Patient‐reported outcome measures and qualitative research in dermatology: the quest for authenticity

‘Although dermatologists think we have insight into the patient's perspective, in reality, we are not that good at understanding it.’1 Fitting then that a key tenet of the BJD's 2015 position statement2 was a commitment to better understanding patients’ perspectives through high‐quality qualitative dermatology research and the creation of a dedicated qualitative section. Three editorials in a series (see Fig. 1) have, to date, focused on different aspects of qualitative research in dermatology: the added value it offers; how ‘quality’ might be judged; and the wide range of approaches and methods available.3,4,5 In this latest editorial, we turn in detail to the development and validation of patient‐reported outcome (PRO) measures, a ‘mixed‐methods’ process in which qualitative research plays a key role. A PRO is defined as any report of the status of a patient's health condition that comes directly from the patient, without interpretation of the patient's response by a clinician or anyone else.6 The measurement of PROs has become an important component of outcomes assessment in clinical research,7 and – more recently – in routine health care.8 Examples of PROs include instruments that measure health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) such as the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI),9 symptoms or treatment satisfaction. In eczema, Heinl et al.10 reviewed all randomized controlled trials conducted in patients between 2000 and 2014 and found that 93% of the 303 trials reviewed included at least one PRO.