You can then upload them into your LAMP project. Once uploaded, surveys instruments can be customized to your liking. For detailed instructions on how to import the surveys, please see the tutorial on creating and managing surveys.
This is fabulous. I have several suggestions/ideas, some I mentioned in the webinar today. I understand this is a lot, more of a wish list for now.
Some option to add comments/suggestions to a given instrument in the library, so that individuals can call attention to typos, or general comments about the measure itself.
More “metadata” stuff about the instrument, such as “duration of assessment” to differentiate things like the standard PHQ-9, which is every 2 weeks, versus a version that is only asking about a day.
A way to “link” instruments based on some type of association. For example, a PHQ-9 (daily) and a PHQ-9 (every 2 weeks) could be linked, as they share similar content and backbone. You might also be able to “link” or “tag” them as related to “depression.”
Some type of copyright information tag. Many instruments are copyrighted and not available for clinical use (without a fee), but have open licenses for research use. This gets VERY confusing. I don’t think ya’ll need to be in the business of doing the verification yourselves, but it would be neat to have an option for the community to provide information of copyright and usage of measures (e.g. a link to a website detailing its usage and copyright). I’d hate for someone to take a measure from your website, use it in their clinic, and then get sued for using an adapted measure. By default all measures would be tagged “copyright usage unverified” or something like that.
Trackers of use in clinics or studies. Users of measures from the library could verify with the Instrument Library they are using it in a study, and perhaps include the clinictrials.gov # - or links to related publications. This will encourage users to use the same measures across studies, rather than slightly modified versions that inhibit collaboration of data. Otherwise, I can see there being 20 versions of the PHQ-9, that all use slightly different word when converting it from the every 2 weeks version to daily version. As an added bonus, it will give the consortium a way to see what studies are being done!
These are some great suggestions, Andrew. We’ve taken a few steps to address them:
You can now comment on a particular instrument by opening up its Notion page and commenting there. You have to sign in with a Notion account to do so (you can just link your Google account), and this will allow users to keep track of who is commenting. We (the admins) will do our best to address any suggestions left there.
There is now a “Duration” tag for each instrument which will give detail to its current temporal resolution. Current options are “hourly,” “daily,” “every other week,” and “monthly.” Our version of PHQ-9 is “daily,” but if you would like to contribute the standard (every other week) one, we can add that instrument to the page and tag its duration as such. Only admins will be able to tag things, so if you feel that we are missing a duration tag or the one currently listed is incorrect, just leave a comment on the page.
There is also now a “Content” tag, so we can list the domain(s) which the instrument is assessing (e.g. depression, anxiety, psychosis).
We will look into listing copyright information, but now just comment on the Notion page if you have any suggestions as to what should be listed.
A standard PHQ-9 form (every other week) to complement the daily version in the library.
The Concise Health Risk Tracking Self Report (16-item version), weekly version - which is an excellent measure for suicidality. Like the prior work with the PHQ-9, I’m really excited to see psychometrics of this one looking at latency to respond! For now, the option list of choices looks a little cumbersome in the mindLAMP app, but I’m hoping it’ll look cleaner in 2.0.
I’ve got a bunch of other measures I’m interesting in working on, such as the QIDS-SR16. Some of these have complicated coding (e.g. only scoring certain items if other items are selected) - so may need to wait until those features are built into the survey builder.
Hey - I noticed the instrument library no longer works:
“You do not have access to BIDMC Division of Digital Psychiatry. Please contact an admin to add you as a member.”
@czysz The correct bug reporting link is: https://docs.lamp.digital/bug - we’ve also updated our documentation and the new survey instrument library can be found in docs.lamp.digital as well.
Thanks for the reply! Maybe I’m being dense here, but I saw the instrument library on the new docs.lamp.digital page - but it just lists the instruments, no option to download or view surveys.
