GOAL INVENTORIES IN STANDARDIZED IMPLEMENTATION OF PERSONALIZED OUTCOME ASSESSMENTS USING GOAL ATTAINMENT SCALING: A LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS
Author(s)
Rebecca Metcalfe, BAH, MA, PhD1, Chere Chapman, MBA, MPH2, Gunes Sevinc, BSc, MSc, PhD3.
1Principal Scientist, Ardea Outcomes, Toronto, ON, Canada, 2Ardea Outcomes, Halifax, NS, Canada, 3Ardea Outcomes, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
1Principal Scientist, Ardea Outcomes, Toronto, ON, Canada, 2Ardea Outcomes, Halifax, NS, Canada, 3Ardea Outcomes, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
OBJECTIVES: Goal attainment scaling (GAS) was recently recognized by the US Food and Drug Agency (FDA) as a personalized outcome measure that can support patient-focused drug development. Per FDA guidance, rigorous implementation requires standardization in how GAS is conducted within a study. Increasingly, condition-specific item banks of patient treatment goals, called goal inventories, are being developed to help standardize GAS processes; align goals with the target intervention’s mechanism of action; and provide a common language for patients and clinicians. To date, there are no comprehensive investigations of inventory development. In this study, we conducted a landscape analysis of the literature on goal inventory development.
METHODS: We conducted a review of peer-reviewed publications in the past 10 years reporting the development of GAS goal inventories. Search terms included permutations of “goal attainment scal*”, “inventory” and “menu”. Data were extracted on: clinical context; intervention-specific adaptations; methodological approaches; and stakeholder engagement
RESULTS: Our search identified 15 eligible publications reporting the development of 11 goal inventories. Inventories were developed for clinical conditions (e.g., hemophilia; n = 8); clinical contexts (e.g., older adults in primary care; n = 2); or both (e.g., prolonged disorders of consciousness in rehabilitation; n = 1). None were adapted for a specific intervention. While all inventories were developed using qualitative methods, specific analytic approaches varied (e.g., content analysis). Only 4 inventories also used quantitative methods. All inventories engaged stakeholders during development, primarily individuals with lived experience or their caregivers (n = 9) and clinical experts (n = 8).
CONCLUSIONS: While the included goal inventories employed different approaches to development, all used qualitative methods and stakeholder engagement, underscoring GAS’s patient-centricity. Notably, although clinical trials require that GAS goals align with the intervention’s mechanism of action, no inventories reported intervention-specific adaptations. Intervention-specific adaptations may offer an avenue to further standardize the GAS process in clinical trials.
METHODS: We conducted a review of peer-reviewed publications in the past 10 years reporting the development of GAS goal inventories. Search terms included permutations of “goal attainment scal*”, “inventory” and “menu”. Data were extracted on: clinical context; intervention-specific adaptations; methodological approaches; and stakeholder engagement
RESULTS: Our search identified 15 eligible publications reporting the development of 11 goal inventories. Inventories were developed for clinical conditions (e.g., hemophilia; n = 8); clinical contexts (e.g., older adults in primary care; n = 2); or both (e.g., prolonged disorders of consciousness in rehabilitation; n = 1). None were adapted for a specific intervention. While all inventories were developed using qualitative methods, specific analytic approaches varied (e.g., content analysis). Only 4 inventories also used quantitative methods. All inventories engaged stakeholders during development, primarily individuals with lived experience or their caregivers (n = 9) and clinical experts (n = 8).
CONCLUSIONS: While the included goal inventories employed different approaches to development, all used qualitative methods and stakeholder engagement, underscoring GAS’s patient-centricity. Notably, although clinical trials require that GAS goals align with the intervention’s mechanism of action, no inventories reported intervention-specific adaptations. Intervention-specific adaptations may offer an avenue to further standardize the GAS process in clinical trials.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
PCR35
Topic
Patient-Centered Research
Topic Subcategory
Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas