scholarly journals A systematic review of the validity and reliability of apathy scales in neurodegenerative conditions

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 903-923 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ratko Radakovic ◽  
Catherine Harley ◽  
Sharon Abrahams ◽  
John M. Starr
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Neurodegenerative Diseases ◽  
Neurodegenerative Disease ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Validation Studies ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Prevalent Symptom

ABSTRACTBackground:There are several scales used to detect apathy in disease populations. Since apathy is a prevalent symptom in many neurodegenerative diseases, this is an especially important context in which to identify and compare scales.Aims:To provide an overview of apathy scales validated in generic and specific neurodegenerative disease populations, compare validation studies’ methodological quality and the psychometric properties of the validated apathy scales.Methods:A systematic review of literature was conducted of articles published between 1980 and 2013. The final articles selected for review were rated on methodological quality and the psychometric properties of the scales used were interpreted.Results:Sixteen articles validating apathy scales were included in the review, five in a generic neurodegenerative sample and eleven in specific neurodegenerative samples. The methodological quality of specific studies varied from poor to excellent. The highest quality, which had psychometrically favorable scales, were the dementia apathy interview and rating (DAIR) and the apathy evaluation scale-clinical version (AES-C) in Alzheimer's disease and the Lille apathy rating scale (LARS) in Parkinson's disease. Generic neurodegenerative disease validation studies were of average methodological quality and yielded inconsistent psychometric properties.Conclusions:Several instruments can be recommended for use in some specific neurodegenerative diseases. Other instruments should either be validated or developed to assess apathy in more generic populations.

scholarly journals 459 - Psychometric properties of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory : A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (S1) ◽  
pp. 180-180
Author(s):  
Philippe Landreville ◽  
Alexandra Champagne ◽  
Patrick Gosselin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
The Body ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
Validity Indices

Background.The Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI) is a widely used self-report measure of anxiety symptoms in older adults. Much research has been conducted on the psychometric properties of the GAI in various populations and using different language versions. Previous reviews of this literature have examined only a small proportion of studies in light of the body of research currently available and have not evaluated the methodological quality of this research. We conducted a systematic review of the psychometric properties of the GAI.Method.Relevant studies (N = 30) were retrieved through a search of electronic databases (Pubmed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and a hand search. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the ‘‘COnsensusbased Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments’’ (COSMIN) checklist.Results.Based on the COSMIN checklist, internal consistency and test reliability were mostly rated as poorly assessed (62.1% and 70% of studies, respectively) and quality of studies examining structural validity was mostly fair (60% of studies). The GAI showed adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Convergent validity indices were highest with measures of generalized anxiety and lowest with instruments that include somatic symptoms. A substantial overlap with measures of depression was reported. While there was no consensus on the factorial structure of the GAI, several studies found it to be unidimensional.Conclusions.The GAI presents satisfactory psychometric properties. However, future efforts should aim to achieve a higher degree of methodological quality.

Psychometric Properties of Postpartum Quality of Life Questionnaires: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocol

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahereh Mokhtarian-Gilani ◽  
Nourossadat kariman ◽  
Hamid Sharif-Nia ◽  
Mahbobeh Ahmadi-Doulabi ◽  
Malihe Nasiri
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Quality Of Life Questionnaires ◽  
General Quality

Abstract Background:The postpartum quality of life refers to women's understanding of their standing in the postpartum crisis that differs depending on their health status, social support, cultural status and values, attitudes, goals and standards. The present systematic review will identify, describe, and critically assess the psychometric properties of postpartum quality of life questionnaires.Methods/Design:A systematic review will be conducted in databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from January 2000 to January 2020. The psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the instruments used in the primary studies will be assessed, and the selection, methodological quality assessment and data extraction processes of the studies will be independently assessed by two reviewers with expertise in conducting systematic reviews, so as to minimize potential personal bias. Eligible resources are selected after any lack of consensus is put to debate.The risk of bias is assessed using the COSMIN RISK of Bias checklist, and to evaluate the quality of the studies, the protocol is written based on the PRISMA-P1 standards. The results of the studies will be judged based on good measurement properties, and the results of all the studies are qualitatively summarized to produce a reference for the general quality of the results. The general quality of the evidence will be determined using a modified GRADE method.Discussion:This study assessed the psychometric properties of questionnaires used for assessing postpartum quality of life and its results can be used to identify the most appropriate tool for health applications in measuring postpartum quality of life. Systematic review registration: reference number in PROSPRO CRD42020166301

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy: a COSMIN systematic review protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Williams ◽  
Bronwyn Beovich
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Jefferson Scale Of Empathy

Abstract Background Empathy is an important characteristic to possess for healthcare professionals. It has been found to improve communication between professionals and patients and to improve clinical health outcomes. The Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) was developed to measure this quality and has been used extensively, and psychometrically appraised, with a variety of cohorts and in different cultural environments. However, no study has been undertaken to systematically examine the methodological quality of studies which have assessed psychometric factors of the JSE. This systematic review will examine the quality of published papers that have reported on psychometric factors of the JSE. Methods A systematic review of studies which report on the psychometric properties of the JSE will be conducted. We will use a predefined search strategy to identify studies meeting the following eligibility criteria: original data is reported on for at least one of the psychometric measurement properties described in the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist, examines the JSE in a healthcare cohort (using the student, physician or health profession versions of the JSE), and is published from January 2001 and in the English language. Conference abstracts, editorials and grey literature will be excluded. Six electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo, PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL) will be systematically searched for articles meeting these criteria and studies will be assessed for eligibility by two review authors. The methodological quality of included papers will be examined using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Discussion A narrative description of the findings will be presented along with summary tables. Recommendations for use of the JSE with various cohorts and circumstances will be offered which may inform future research in this field. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018111412

scholarly journals Systematic review of the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for rheumatoid arthritis in the foot and ankle

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 1788-1799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Belen Ortega-Avila ◽  
Laura Ramos-Petersen ◽  
Pablo Cervera-Garvi ◽  
Christopher J Nester ◽  
José Miguel Morales-Asencio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Patient Reported

Objective: To identify self-reported outcome measures specific to the foot and ankle in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and to investigate the methodological quality and psychometric properties of these measures. Method: A systematic review focusing on patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Setting: The search was conducted in the PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PEDro and Google Scholar databases, based on the following inclusion criteria: population (with rheumatoid arthritis) > 18 years; psychometric or clinimetric validation studies of patient-reported outcomes specific to the foot and ankle, in different languages, with no time limit. Two of the present authors independently assessed the quality of the studies located and extracted the relevant data. Terwee’s criteria and the COSMIN checklist were employed to ensure adequate methodological quality. Results: Of the initial 431 studies considered, 14 met the inclusion criteria, representing 7,793 patients (56.8 years). These instruments were grouped into three dimensions (pain, perceived health status and quality of life and disability). The time to complete any of the PROMs varies around 15 minutes. PROMs criterias with the worst scores by COSMIN, 92.85% and 85.71% were criterion validity, measurement error, internal consistency and responsiveness. 28.57% of PROMs were compared with the measurement properties. Conclusion: the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score achieved the highest number of positive criteria (according to Terwee and COSMIN), and is currently the most appropriate for patients with Rheumatoid arthritis.

Instruments for Measuring Satisfaction With Physical Therapy Care: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 100 (9) ◽  
pp. 1690-1700
Author(s):  
Daniel Gutiérrez-Sánchez ◽  
David Pérez-Cruzado ◽  
Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Objective Several instruments to measure patient satisfaction have been developed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The selection of the most appropriate instrument is very important. The purpose of this study was to identify instruments for assessing satisfaction with physical therapy care and their psychometric properties and to evaluate the methodological quality of studies on psychometric properties. Methods A systematic search was conducted in ProQuest Medline, SciELO, ProQuest PsycINFO, Theseus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Articles published from 1990 to 2019, in English and Spanish, were used as limits. This systematic review followed the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. The articles were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments 4-point checklist. Eighteen studies were included. Results Nine instruments were found to be specifically designed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The methodological quality of the studies was “fair” for most of the psychometric characteristics analyzed (43 items), with 24 properties scored as “poor,” 5 as “good,” and 3 as “excellent.” Conclusions Different instrument characteristics—such as the scope and population with which the instrument will be used, its dimensions, the number of items, and the evidence shown in the evaluation of each psychometric property—should be considered by clinicians and researchers to decide which instrument is the best to measure the construct of patient satisfaction with physical therapy. Impact Evaluating patient satisfaction is very useful in clinical practice at the hospital, community, and primary care levels. Physical therapist clinicians and researchers can use this systematic review to select instruments whose characteristics will best measure their patients’ satisfaction with physical therapy care.

scholarly journals Scales to Assess the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

2008 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 156-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Armijo Olivo ◽  
Luciana Gazzi Macedo ◽  
Inae Caroline Gadotti ◽  
Jorge Fuentes ◽  
Tasha Stanton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Physical Therapy ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Health Care Research ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Manual Search

Background and PurposeThe methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is commonly evaluated in order to assess the risk of biased estimates of treatment effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify scales used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs in health care research and summarize the content, construction, development, and psychometric properties of these scales.MethodsExtensive electronic database searches, along with a manual search, were performed.ResultsOne hundred five relevant studies were identified. They accounted for 21 scales and their modifications. The majority of scales had not been rigorously developed or tested for validity and reliability. The Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity for physical therapy trials has not been supported.Discussion and ConclusionMany scales are used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs, but most of these scales have not been adequately developed and have not been adequately tested for validity and reliability. A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of measures of upper limb activity performance in adults with and without spasticity undergoing neurorehabilitation–A systematic review

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0246288
Author(s):  
Shannon Pike ◽  
Anne Cusick ◽  
Kylie Wales ◽  
Lisa Cameron ◽  
Lynne Turner-Stokes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Upper Limb ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Neurological Impairment ◽  
Measurement Quality ◽  
Measurement Tools ◽  
Limb Spasticity ◽  
Psychometric Studies

Introduction This systematic review appraises the measurement quality of tools which assess activity and/or participation in adults with upper limb spasticity arising from neurological impairment, including methodological quality of the psychometric studies. Differences in the measurement quality of the tools for adults with a neurological impairment, but without upper limb spasticity, is also presented. Methods 29 measurement tools identified in a published review were appraised in this systematic review. For each identified tool, we searched 3 databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL) to identify psychometric studies completed with neurorehabilitation samples. Methodological quality of instrument evaluations was assessed with use of the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Synthesis of ratings allowed an overall rating of the psychometric evidence for each measurement tool to be calculated. Results 149 articles describing the development or evaluation of psychometric properties of 22 activity and/or participation measurement tools were included. Evidence specific to tool use for adults with spasticity was identified within only 15 of the 149 articles and provided evidence for 9 measurement tools only. Overall, COSMIN appraisal highlighted a lack of evidence of measurement quality. Synthesis of ratings demonstrated all measures had psychometric weaknesses or gaps in evidence (particularly for use of tools with adults with spasticity). Conclusions The systematic search, appraisal and synthesis revealed that currently there is insufficient measurement quality evidence to recommend one tool over another. Notwithstanding this conclusion, newer tools specifically designed for use with people with neurological conditions who have upper limb spasticity, have emergent measurement properties that warrant further research. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014013190.

scholarly journals Systematic review of instruments for assessing culinary skills and other related concepts in adults: What is the quality of evidence of their psychometric properties?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Rissatto Teixeira ◽  
Daniela Bicalho ◽  
Betzabeth Slater ◽  
Tacio de Mendonça Lima
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Adult Population ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Ongoing Research ◽  
Open Access Journals

AbstractBackgroundCulinary skills and food practices are important objects of study in the field of Public Health. Studies that propose to develop instruments for assessing such constructs show lack of methodological uniformity to provide evidence of validity and reliability of their instruments.ObjectiveTo identify studies that have developed instruments to measure culinary skills and other related concepts in adult population, and critically assess their psychometric properties.DesignA systematic review was conducted. A literature search was performed in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, LILACS, and Web of Science databases until June 2019. The Directory of Open Access Journals and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify relevant grey literature. Searching, selecting and reporting were done according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Statement. Two reviewers were independently involved in study selection, data extraction, and instrument quality assessment. A third reviewer resolved all disagreements.ResultsThe search identified 1428 potentially relevant studies, out of which 18 had potentially relevant records and 8 met the inclusion criteria. Studies used literature, experts’ judgement, or qualitative interviews to develop the instruments. No studies received positive scores for all validity criteria. Although most studies received positive scores for internal consistency, none of them received positive scores for stability or presented evidence for content validity. One study showed positive results for construct validity. Two studies reported criterion validity, whose scores were deemed negative.ConclusionsMany studies that surveyed culinary skills and related latent phenomena were identified. The overall quality of the psychometric properties of most instruments was considered insufficient, especially for validity measures. A universal definition of culinary skills as an overarching construct is recommended. The flaws observed in these studies show that there is a need for ongoing research in the area of the psychometric properties of instruments assessing these constructs.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of the Geriatric Anxiety Inventory

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 368-368
Author(s):  
Philippe Landreville ◽  
Alexandra Champagne ◽  
Patrick Gosselin
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
Validity Indices

Abstract The Geriatric Anxiety Inventory (GAI) is a widely used self-report measure of anxiety symptoms in older adults. Although much research has been conducted on the psychometric properties of the GAI, previous reviews have examined only a small proportion of studies and have not evaluated the methodological quality of this work. In view of this, we conducted a systematic review of the psychometric properties of the GAI and it’s short form (GAI-SF). Relevant studies (N = 31) were retrieved through a search of electronic databases (Pubmed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and a hand search. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the ‘‘COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments’’ (COSMIN) checklist. Based on the COSMIN checklist, internal consistency and test reliability were mostly rated as poorly assessed (63% and 72.7% of studies, respectively) and quality of studies examining structural validity was mostly fair (60% of studies). Both the GAI and GAI-SF showed adequate internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Convergent validity indices were highest with measures of generalized anxiety and lowest with instruments that include somatic symptoms. Substantial overlap with measures of depression was reported. While there is no consensus on the factorial structure of the GAI, the short version was found to be unidimensional. Our review therefore suggests that the GAI and GAI-SF have satisfactory psychometric properties while indicating that future efforts should aim to achieve a higher degree of methodological quality.

scholarly journals Protocol for a Systematic Review Exploring the Psychometric Properties of Health and Wellbeing Measures Used With Adolescents Experiencing Intellectual Disabilities.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Maguire ◽  
Jenny Davison ◽  
Marian McLaughlin ◽  
Victoria Simms
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Future Health ◽  
Health And Wellbeing

Abstract Background Whilst there are studies that have systematically reviewed the psychometric properties of Quality-of-Life measures for children and young people experiencing intellectual disabilities, these narrowly focus on disease or health conditions. The objective of this planned systematic review is therefore to collate, summarise and critically appraise the psychometric properties of health and wellbeing measures used with adolescents (aged 11–16) with an intellectual disability. Methods We designed and registered a study protocol for a systematic review of studies which explores the psychometric properties of health and wellbeing measures used with adolescents experiencing intellectual disabilities. Electronic databases including PsycINFO, CINAHL, MEDLINE and ERIC will be searched using predefined search terms to identify relevant studies. Quantitative and mixed-methods studies, and studies published in peer-reviewed journals or grey literature will be included. Review papers, editorials and case studies will be excluded. Eligible studies should identify self and/or proxy reported health and wellbeing measures which assess health and wellbeing among adolescents with intellectual disabilities. The methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed by applying the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist. The quality of the evidence (i.e., the total body of evidence used for the overall ratings on each psychometric property of an instrument) will be evaluated in accordance with the GRADE guidelines. Discussion This systematic review will be among the first to systematically explore the psychometric properties of health and wellbeing measures used with adolescents experiencing intellectual disabilities. By providing evidence-based knowledge about measures being used in health and wellbeing research amongst this population, and more importantly how reliable and valid these measures are, the most suitable for use will be identified. Our findings will be of potential interest to clinicians, researchers and service providers who need information about the methodological quality and the characteristics of measures to make informed decisions about the most reliable and valid tool for a specific purpose. The findings from this study will contribute to the knowledge surrounding available and appropriate measures to use for measuring the health and wellbeing of adolescents with intellectual disabilities, which are necessary to inform intervention development and future health policy. Systematic Review Registration The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The registration number is: CRD42021231697.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document