Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) play a central role in clinical research and patient care resulting in a plethora of standardized PROMs to measure a range of constructs, including disease symptoms, health-related quality of life, and health status (Meadows/Reaney) used in a range of settings, including the nursing environment. However, the use of PROMs in drug development and their use in healthcare evaluation do not easily marry together. In drug development, standardization of measurement is key to the interpretation of the formation at a population level with minimal biases. However, in health care, the individual patient perspective, priority, and needs should be taken into account whereas, in the clinical encounter, one has to also deal with what is particular and unique. The purpose of this paper is to describe the characteristics of the phenomenological method as a means within a mixed-method framework, to supplement participants’ patient-reported outcome numeric scores with a more in-depth commentary on the essence of the lived health experiences.
AbbottA. (2004). Methods of discovery: Heuristics for the social sciences. W. W. Norton.
2.
AlhazmiA. A.KaufmannA. (2022). Phenomenological qualitative methods applied to the analysis of cross-cultural experience in novel educational social contexts. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 785134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.785134
3.
AnjumR. L.CopelandS.RoccaE. (2020). Introduction: Why is philosophy relevant for clinical practice?. In AnjumR. L.CopelandS.RoccaE. (Eds.), Rethinking causality, complexity and evidence for the unique patient (pp. 3–11). Springer.
4.
BaschE.DealA. M.KrisM. G.ScherH. I.HudisC. A.SabbatiniP.RogakL.BennettA. V.DueckA. C.AtkinsonT. M.ChouJ. F.DulkoD.SitL.BarzA.NovotnyP.FruscioneM.SloanJ. A.SchragD. (2016). Symptom monitoring with patient-reported outcomes during routine cancer treatment: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 34(6), 557–565.
5.
BiestaG. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95–117). Sage.
6.
BraunV.ClarkeV.HayfieldN.MollerN.TischnerI. (2019). Story completion: A method with exciting promise. In LiamputtongP. (ed) Handbook of research methods in health social sciences (pp. 1–18). Springer.
7.
ChlorosG. D.ProdromidisA. D.GiannoudisP. V. (2023). Has anything changed in Evidence-Based Medicine?Injury, 54, S20–S25.
8.
ClandininD. J.ConnellyF. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass.
9.
ClarkJ. (2008). Philosophy, understanding and the consultation: A fusion of horizons. British Journal of General Practice, 58(546), 58–60. https://doi.org/10.3399%2Fbjgp08X263929
10.
CreswellJ. W.ClarkV. L. P. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Sage.
11.
CroweS.CresswellK.RobertsonA.HubyG.AveryA.SheikhA. (2011). The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 100. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100
12.
EngwardH.GoldspinkS. (2020). Lodgers in the house: Living with the data in interpretive phenomenological analysis research. Reflective Practice, 21, 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2019.1708305
13.
FlinterudS. I.MoiA. L.GjengedalE.EllingsenS. (2022). Understanding the course of critical illness through a lifeworld approach. Qualitative Health Research, 32(3), 531–542.
14.
GadamerH.-G. (2003). Truth and method (WeinsheimerJMarshallD. G., Trans.; 2nd ed.). Continuum.
15.
GiorgiA. (1994). A phenomenological perspective on certain qualitative research methods. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 25(2), 190–220.
16.
GiorgiA. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Duquesne University Press.
17.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine de Gruyter.
18.
Guerrero-CastañedaR. F.de Oliva MenezesT. M.Ojeda-VargasM. G. (2017). Características de la entrevista fenomenológica en investigación en enfermería. Revista Gaúcha De Enfermagem, 38(2), e67458. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-1447.2017.02.67458
19.
HaahrA.KirkevoldM.HallE. O.ØstergaardK. (2011). Living with advanced Parkinson’s disease: A constant struggle with unpredictability. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(2), 408–417.
20.
HarveyL. (2012–20). Social research glossary. Quality Research International.
21.
HaysD. G.SinghA. A. (2011). Qualitative inquiry in clinical and educational settings. Guilford Press.
22.
HøffdingS.MartinyK. (2016). Framing a phenomenological interview: What, why and how. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 15, 539–564.
23.
HolmA.DreyerP. (2018). Nurse-patient communication within the context of non-sedated mechanical ventilation: A hermeneutic-phenomenological study. Nursing in Critical Care, 23(2), 88–94.
24.
HolmA.DreyerP. (2017). Intensive care unit patients’ experience of being conscious during endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation. Nursing in Critical Care, 22(2), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.1220
25.
HowickJ. (2011). The philosophy of evidence-based medicine. BMJ Books/Wiley-Blackwell.
26.
JarvisP. (1987). Meaningful and meaningless experience: Towards an analysis of learning from life. Adult Education Quarterly, 37, 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848187037003004
27.
KaushikV.WalshC. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research. Social Sciences, 8(9), 255. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255
28.
KotronoulasG.PapadopoulouC.SimpsonM. F.McPhelimJ.MackL.MaguireR. (2018). Using patient-reported outcome measures to deliver enhanced supportive care to people with lung cancer: Feasibility and acceptability of a nurse-led consultation model. Supportive Care in Cancer, 26(11), 3729–3737.
29.
KramerM.AdamsT. (2017). Ethnography. In The Sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vol. 4, pp. 458–461). Sage Publications, Inc.
30.
KyteD.IvesJ.DraperH.CalvertM. (2016). Current practices in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection in clinical trials: A cross-sectional survey of UK trial staff and management. BMJ Open, 6, e012281.
31.
LaschK. E.MarquisP.VigneuxM.AbetzL.ArnouldB.BaylissM.CrawfordB.RosaK. (2010). PRO development: Rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation. Quality of Life Research, 19, 1087–1096.
LikertR. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 1–55.
34.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
35.
LopezK. A.WillisD. G. (2004). Descriptive versus interpretive phenomenology: Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qualitative Health Research, 14, 726–735.
36.
LowM. (2020). Above and beyond statistical evidence. Why stories matter for clinical decisions and shared decision making. In AnjumR. L.CopelandS.RoccaE. (Eds.), Rethinking causality, complexity and evidence for the unique patient (pp. 127–136). Springer.
37.
LundströmS.AhlströmB. H.JormfeldtH.ErikssonH.SkärsäterI. (2017). The meaning of the lived experience of lifestyle changes for people with severe mental illness. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 38(9), 717–725.
38.
MartinsenB.NorlykA.GramstadA. (2022). The experience of dependence on homecare among people ageing at home. Ageing & Society.
39.
MatuaG. A.Van Der WalD. M. (2015). Differentiating between descriptive and interpretive phenomenological research approaches. Nurse Researcher, 22(6), 22.
40.
MaxcyS. J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed methods research in the social sciences: The search for multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the philosophy of formalism. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 51–89). Sage.
41.
McClimansL. M. (2019). First person epidemiological measures: Vehicles for patient centered care. Synthese, 198(Suppl10), 2521–2537.
42.
MeadowsK. (2021). Interpreting patient-reported outcome measures: Narrative and the “Fusion of Horizons”. Philosophy of Medicine, 2(2), 1–14.
MeadowsK. A.ReaneyM. (2023). Bringing the patient’s perspectives forward in drug development and health-care evaluation. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 23(3), 267–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2023.2166492
45.
MeadowsK. A.ReaneyM. (2024). Story completion (SC) – an epistemological approach to the interpretation of patient-reported outcomes?Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 24(1), 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2023.2268833
46.
MishlerE. G. (1995). Models of narrative analysis: A typology. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 5(2), 87–123.
47.
MoustakasC. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage.
48.
NealeJ. N.StrangJ. (2015). Philosophical ruminations on measurement: Methodological orientations of patient reported outcome measures (PROMS). Journal of Mental Health, 24(3), 123–125.
49.
NeubauerB. E.WitkopC. T.VarpioL. (2019). How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019-0509-2
50.
NorlykA.MartinsenB.DreyerP.HaahrA. (2023). Why phenomenology came into nursing: The legitimacy and usefulness of phenomenology in theory building in the discipline of nursing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231210433
51.
PansiriJ. (2005). Pragmatism: A methodological approach to researching strategic alliances in tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Planning and Development, 2, 191–206.
52.
PorterI.DaveyA.GangannagaripalliJ.EvansJ.BramwellC.EvansP.GibbonsC.ValderasJ. M. (2021). Integrating Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) into routine nurse-led primary care for patients with multimorbidity: A feasibility and acceptability study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 19(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-021-01748-2
53.
SackettD. L.StrausS. E.RichardsonW. S.RosenbergW.HaynesR. B. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (2nd ed.). Churchill Livingstone.
54.
SalsberryP. J. (1989). Dialogue on a research issue: Phenomenological research in nursing—response. Nursing Science Quarterly, 2, 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/089431848900200106
55.
SandelowskiM. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description?Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340.
56.
SandelowskiM. (2010).What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing & Health, 33(1), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20362
57.
SchoonenboomJ.JohnsonR. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(Suppl 2), 107–131.
SmithJ. A.NizzaI. E. (2022). Essentials of interpretative phenomenological analysis. American Psychological Association.
61.
SmithJ. A.OsbornM. (2015). Interpretative phenomenological analysis as a useful methodology for research on the lived experience of pain. British Journal of Pain, 9(1), 41–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463714541642
62.
SymondsJ. E.GorardS. (2009, September3–6). The death of mixed methods: Research labels and their casualties. The British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh.
63.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. (2006). Guidance for industry: Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims: Draft guidance. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 79.
64.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration. (2022). Patient-focused drug development: incorporating clinical outcome assessments into endpoints for regulatory decision-making. Draft Guidance for Industry, Food and Drug Administration Staff and Other Stakeholders.
65.
Van ManenM. (1997). Researching lived experience human science for an action sensitive pedagogy (2nd ed.). Routledge.
66.
Van ManenM. (2017). But is it phenomenology?. Qualitative Health Research, 27(6), 775–779.
67.
WalkerW. (2011). Hermeneutic inquiry insights into the process of interviewing. Nurse Researcher, 18(2), 19–27.
68.
WangC. C.GealeS. K. (2015). The power of story: Narrative inquiry as a methodology in nursing research. International Journal of Nursing Science, 2(2), 195–198.
69.
WareJ.Jr.KosinskiM.KellerS. D. (1996). A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34(3), 220–233.
70.
WareJ. E.Jr.SherbourneC. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.
71.
WyrwichK. W.WolinskyF. D. (2008). Identifying meaningful intra-individual change standards for health-related quality of life measures. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 6(1), 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2753.2000.00238.x
72.
ZahaviD. (2015). You, me and we: The sharing of emotional experiences. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 22(1–2), 84–101.
73.
ZahaviD. (2019). Phenomenolgy: The basics. Routledge.
