DEVELOPMENT AND CONTENT VALIDATION OF THE FIRST CARETAKER-REPORTED GENERIC HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE (HRQL) INSTRUMENT FOR HORSES
Author(s)
Thaisa L. Sandri, DVM MSc PhD1, Cory Noble, PhD2, Jacky Reid, DVM PhD3, E Scott, Prof.4, Andrea Nolan, Prof5.
1Outcomes Research, Global Medical Affairs, Zoetis Inc., Parsippany, NJ, USA, 2Global Commercial Development & Life Cycle – Petcare, Equine, Zoetis Inc., Parsippany, NJ, USA, 3School of Biodiversity, One Health & Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 4University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 5Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
1Outcomes Research, Global Medical Affairs, Zoetis Inc., Parsippany, NJ, USA, 2Global Commercial Development & Life Cycle – Petcare, Equine, Zoetis Inc., Parsippany, NJ, USA, 3School of Biodiversity, One Health & Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 4University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 5Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVES: Despite horses' roles as companions, athletes, and working animals, no standardized, validated health-related quality of life (HRQL) instrument exists for equines across contexts and life stages. Existing tools focus on acute conditions, welfare compliance, or disease-specific contexts and require expert training to administer. This study aimed to develop a conceptually grounded, psychometrically rigorous caretaker-reported generic HRQL instrument for horses through systematic application of best practice in observer-reported outcome measure development.
METHODS: A five-phase approach was employed: (1) systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines (PubMed, Discover, and SCOPUS) to identify existing assessment tools and behavioral indicators; (2) semi-structured qualitative interviews with horse caretakers and equine experts using grounded theory until data redundancy; (3) structured expert consensus item selection using weighted voting and statistical analysis; (4) international content validation survey assessing item relevance (I-CVIR >0.60) and clarity (I-CVIC ≥0.70); (5) pre-testing and refinement.
RESULTS: Screening of 5,139 records yielded 216 publications for analysis. Twenty-five equine assessment tools were identified of which none were validated generic HRQL instruments. From 955 unique behavioral indicators extracted, combined with 36 interviews (24 caretakers, 12 experts), 314 initial items were generated. Expert consensus reduced this to 66 items for content validation. An international survey across major English-speaking countries (n=98; Australia/New Zealand=40, UK=26, USA=26, other regions=6) and a panel of 10 equine experts evaluated items for relevance and clarity. One item (listless) failed both thresholds but was retained owing to geographic variability. The pilot-ready instrument comprised 66 items relevant and clear across international horse caretaker populations.
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a critical step towards the first conceptually grounded, psychometrically developed generic caretaker-reported HRQL instrument for horses, addressing a critical gap in equine veterinary medicine. Rigorous methodology ensures content validity and international applicability. Field testing is underway to establish psychometric properties and clinical utility.*Thaisa L. Sandri and Cory Noble share first authorship.
METHODS: A five-phase approach was employed: (1) systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines (PubMed, Discover, and SCOPUS) to identify existing assessment tools and behavioral indicators; (2) semi-structured qualitative interviews with horse caretakers and equine experts using grounded theory until data redundancy; (3) structured expert consensus item selection using weighted voting and statistical analysis; (4) international content validation survey assessing item relevance (I-CVIR >0.60) and clarity (I-CVIC ≥0.70); (5) pre-testing and refinement.
RESULTS: Screening of 5,139 records yielded 216 publications for analysis. Twenty-five equine assessment tools were identified of which none were validated generic HRQL instruments. From 955 unique behavioral indicators extracted, combined with 36 interviews (24 caretakers, 12 experts), 314 initial items were generated. Expert consensus reduced this to 66 items for content validation. An international survey across major English-speaking countries (n=98; Australia/New Zealand=40, UK=26, USA=26, other regions=6) and a panel of 10 equine experts evaluated items for relevance and clarity. One item (listless) failed both thresholds but was retained owing to geographic variability. The pilot-ready instrument comprised 66 items relevant and clear across international horse caretaker populations.
CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a critical step towards the first conceptually grounded, psychometrically developed generic caretaker-reported HRQL instrument for horses, addressing a critical gap in equine veterinary medicine. Rigorous methodology ensures content validity and international applicability. Field testing is underway to establish psychometric properties and clinical utility.*Thaisa L. Sandri and Cory Noble share first authorship.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
PCR208
Topic
Clinical Outcomes, Patient-Centered Research, Real World Data & Information Systems
Topic Subcategory
Instrument Development, Validation, & Translation, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes
Disease
Veterinary Medicine