Development of New BREAST-Q Scales to Measure the Experience of Breast Implant Illness
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: Breast implant illness (BII) is a term used to describe a constellation of systemic symptoms reported by women post-implant-based breast reconstruction (IBRR). Research is underway to understand the pathophysiology of BII and no diagnostic tests currently exist. Hence, understanding the patient experience of BII is of utmost importance. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are tools designed to facilitate the inclusion of patient voice in clinical care. The purpose of this study is to develop a long- and short-form of BII symptom severity questionnaires. These new questionnaires will be part of the BREAST-Q – a rigorous, validated, gold standard PROM for breast cancer surgery. METHOD: An international, multistep, multiphase approach consistent with established PROM development guidelines will be used. In Step 1, a review of published and gray literature was conducted to identify a comprehensive list of symptoms associated with BII, followed by an online, Delphi survey and consensus meeting with stakeholders (patients, clinicians, researchers, and a regulatory member) to identify top 20,10 and 5 symptoms associated with BII. In Step 2, we conducted a web-scraping study of 9 publicly available BII-specific web forums to extract de-identified BII-relevant posts and comments. In Step 3, using an interview guide, we conducted in-depth, one-on-one interviews with women with BII-like symptoms recruited through patient partners from the United States and Canada. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data from Steps 2 and 3 were analyzed line-by-line to extract relevant concepts and constant comparison was used to develop a conceptual framework for BII and an item pool. The item pool was used to develop the draft of the long- and short-form of the BREAST-Q BII symptom severity scales. RESULTS: In Step 1, 44 symptoms were reviewed by the Delphi panel (N=25) and a consensus was reached on the top 19 and 6 symptoms to be included in the long- and short-form of the scales. In Step 2, we found that pre-implant surgery, women were concerned about the risks of developing BII with certain types of implants. Women who were experiencing BII-like symptoms post-implants described their symptoms, were worried about worsening of symptoms and identified the need for more resources on BII and explant surgery. In Step 3, 20 women (age, 32-58y) elaborated on the health-related quality of life impact of BII, including appearance and body image (eg, skin/hair changes, weight loss/gain), and physical (eg, fatigue, pain, gastrointestinal issues), psychological (eg, anxiety, depression), social (eg, participation in recreation, work), and sexual (eg, vaginal dryness, low libido) well-being. Participants’ words were used to develop draft versions of the BREAST-Q BII symptom severity scales. CONCLUSION: The BREAST-Q BII symptom severity scales are designed to be used in clinical practice and research to monitor and evaluate BII from the patient perspective and may be used for patient education pre-IBBR. The next steps in the development involve pilot testing and refining of draft scales followed by a field test with a large sample to establish psychometric properties.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».