Measurement properties of family resilience assessment questionnaires: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 581-591
Author(s):  
Jia Zhou ◽  
Bin He ◽  
Yaoyu He ◽  
Wei Huang ◽  
Hongxu Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Family Resilience ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Social Domain ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
The Family ◽  
Resilience Assessment

Abstract Background There have been numerous measurement questionnaires to estimate the level of family resilience. However, we lack published evidence regarding the most appropriate family resilience questionnaire in different adversity domains. Objective This study critically assesses and contrasts the measurement properties of questionnaires measuring family resilience in two domains: health care domain and social domain. Methods Ten electronic databases were searched for studies concerning the establishment, adaptation or evaluation of the measurement properties of a family resilience assessment questionnaire. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. On the basis of methodological quality and scoring criteria for the quality of questionnaires, the overall evidence of each questionnaire was rated. Results A total of 4084 initial studies were obtained, 23 of which met our inclusion criteria assessing 12 different questionnaires. The structural validity (23 studies) and internal consistency (22 studies) were the most frequently used measurement properties. Only two studies tested responsiveness, and the measurement error was not examined in any studies. The Family Resilience Assessment Scale (FRAS) and Italian version of the Walsh Family Resilience Questionnaire (Walsh-IT) showed positive evidence in health care domain. The FRAS performed well in social domain with specific adversity, and the Family Resilience Questionnaire (FRQ) received a good score in social domain without specific adversity. Conclusion For health care domain, we recommend the FRAS and Walsh-IT. For social domain with specific adversity, we recommend the FRAS questionnaire. For social domain without specific adversity, the FRQ is recommended.

scholarly journals How to Select a Questionnaire with a Good Methodological Quality?

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saul Martins Paiva ◽  
Matheus de França Perazzo ◽  
Fernanda Ruffo Ortiz ◽  
Isabela Almeida Pordeus ◽  
Paulo Antônio Martins-Júnior
Keyword(s):  
Oral Health ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Impact

Abstract In the last decades, several instruments have been used to evaluate the impact of oral health problems on the oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of individuals. However, some instruments lack thorough methodological validation or present conceptual differences that hinder comparisons with instruments. Thus, it can be difficult to clinicians and researchers to select a questionnaire that accurately reflect what are really meaningful to individuals. This short communication aimed to discuss the importance of use an appropriate checklist to select an instrument with a good methodological quality. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to provide tools for evidence-based instrument selection. The COSMIN checklist comprises ten boxes that evaluate whether a study meets the standard for good methodological quality and two additional boxes to meet studies that use the Item Response Theory method and general requirements for results generalization, resulting in four steps to be followed. In this way, it is required at least some expertise in psychometrics or clinimetrics to a wide-ranging use of this checklist. The COSMIN applications include its use to ensure the standardization of cross-cultural adaptations and safer comparisons between measurement studies and evaluation of methodological quality of systematic reviews of measurement properties. Also, it can be used by students when training about measurement properties and by editors and reviewers when revising manuscripts on this topic. The popularization of COSMIN checklist is therefore necessary to improve the selection and evaluation of health measurement instruments.

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 The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content

2010 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidwine B Mokkink ◽  
Caroline B Terwee ◽  
Dirk L Knol ◽  
Paul W Stratford ◽  
Jordi Alonso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cosmin Checklist

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.

scholarly journals Instruments for measuring nursing research competence: a protocol for a scoping review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042325
Author(s):  
Qirong Chen ◽  
Chongmei Huang ◽  
Aimee R Castro ◽  
Siyuan Tang
Keyword(s):  
Scoping Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Target Population ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Nursing Research ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Research Competence ◽  
Scoping Reviews

IntroductionNursing research competence of nursing personnel has received much attention in recent years, as nursing has developed as both an independent academic discipline and an evidence-based practiing profession. Instruments for appraising nursing research competence are important, as they can be used to assess nursing research competence of the target population, showing changes of this variable over time and measuring the effectiveness of interventions for improving nursing research competence. There is a need to map the current state of the science of the instruments for nursing research competence, and to identify well validated and reliable instruments. This paper describes a protocol for a scoping review to identify, evaluate, compare and summarise the instruments designed to measure nursing research competence.Methods and analysisThe scoping review will be conducted following Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework and Levac et al’s additional recommendations for applying this framework. The scoping review will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. The protocol is registered through the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ksh43/). Eight English databases and two Chinese databases will be searched between 1 December 2020 and 31 December 2020 to retrieve manuscripts which include instrument(s) of nursing research competence. The literature screening and data extraction will be conducted by two researchers, independently. A third researcher will be involved when consensus is needed. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments methodology will be used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies on measurement properties of the instruments, as well as the quality of all the instruments identified.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not needed. We will disseminate the findings through a conference focusing on nursing research competence and publication of the results in a peer-reviewed journal.

scholarly journals A systematic review of the measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures used for adults with an ankle fracture

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca McKeown ◽  
David R. Ellard ◽  
Abdul-Rasheed Rabiu ◽  
Eleni Karasouli ◽  
Rebecca S. Kearney
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Ankle Fracture ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Ankle fractures are painful and debilitating injuries that pose a significant burden to society and healthcare systems. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used outcome measures in clinical trials of interventions for ankle fracture but there is little evidence on their validity and reliability. This systematic review aims to identify and appraise evidence for the measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs used in adults with an ankle fracture using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) methodology. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL online databases for evidence of measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs. Articles were included if they assessed or described the development of the PROM in adults with ankle fracture. Articles were ineligible if they used the PROM to assess the measurement properties of another instrument. Abstracts without full articles and conference proceedings were ineligible, as were articles that adapted the PROM under evaluation without any formal justification of the changes as part of a cross-cultural validation or translation process. Two reviewers completed the screening. To assess methodological quality we used COSMIN risk of bias checklist and summarised evidence using COSMIN quality criteria and a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality and extracted the data for a sample of articles. Results The searches returned a total of 377 articles. From these, six articles were included after application of eligibility criteria. These articles evaluated three PROMs: A-FORM, OMAS and AAOS. The A-FORM had evidence of a robust development process within the patient population, however lacks post-formulation testing. The OMAS showed sufficient levels of reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. The AAOS showed low quality evidence of sufficient construct validity. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence to support the recommendation of a particular PROM for use in adult ankle fracture research based on COSMIN methodology. Further validation of these outcome measures is required in order to ensure PROMs used in this area are sufficiently valid and reliable to assess treatment effects. This would enable high quality, evidenced-based management of adults with ankle fracture.

scholarly journals Measuring Instruments In Cardiology Adapted Into Portuguese Language Of Brazil: A Systematic Review

2014 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 368-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilia Estevam Cornélio ◽  
Neusa Maria Costa Alexandre ◽  
Thaís Moreira São-João
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Health Knowledge ◽  
Critical Evaluation ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Measuring Instruments ◽  
Adaptation Process

This was a systematic review aimed at identifying and characterizing measuring instruments, developed in the context of cardiology, which were adapted into Portuguese language of Brazil. Systematic searches were performed in six databases. Information extracted included cultural adaptation process and measurement properties. To assess the methodological quality of studies, criteria based on international guidelines for cultural adaptation of instruments were used. Among the 114 articles found, 14 were eligible for review. Of these, most evaluated quality of life (35.7%) and health knowledge/learning (28.6%). Most studies followed all stages of the adaptation process recommended in the literature. With respect to measurement properties, internal consistency, verified by Cronbach’s alpha, was the property reported in the majority of the studies, as well as construct and criterion validity. This study is expected to provide to the scientific community a critical evaluation of adapted questionnaires available in the context of cardiology.


scholarly journals What is the role of locoregional anesthesia in breast surgery? A systematic literature review focused on pain intensity, opioid consumption, adverse events, and patient satisfaction.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pasquale Sansone ◽  
Luca Gregorio Giaccari ◽  
Mario Faenza ◽  
Pasquale Di Costanzo ◽  
Sara Izzo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Breast Surgery ◽  
The United States ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Anesthetic Techniques ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
Locoregional Anesthesia ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background: Breast surgery in the United States is common. Pain affects up to 50% of women undergoing breast surgery and can interfere with postoperative outcomes. General anesthesia is the conventional, most frequently used anaesthetic technique. Various locoregional anesthetic techniques are also used for breast surgeries. A systematic review of the use of locoregional anesthesia for postoperative pain in breast surgery is needed to clarify its role in pain management.Objectives: To systematically review literature to establish the efficacy and the safety of locoregional anesthesia used in the treatment of pain after breast surgery.Methods: Embase, MEDLINE, Google Scholar and Cochrane Central Trials Register were systematically searched in Mars 2020 for studies examining locoregional anesthesia for management of pain in adults after breast surgery. The methodological quality of the studies and their results were appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and specific measurement properties criteria, respectively.Results: Nineteen studies evaluating locoregional anesthesia were included: 1058 patients underwent lumpectomy/mastectomy, 142 breast augmentation and 79 breast reduction. Locoregional anesthesia provides effective anesthesia and analgesia in the perioperative setting, however no statistically significant difference emerged if compared to other techniques. For mastectomy only, the use of locoregional techniques reduces pain in the first hour after the end of the surgery if compared to other procedures (p = 0.02). Other potentially beneficial effects of locoregional anesthesia include decreased need for opioids, decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting, fewer complications and increased patient satisfaction. All this improves postoperative recovery and shortens hospitalization stay. In none of these cases, locoregional anesthesia was statistically superior to other techniques.Conclusion: The results of our review showed no differences between locoregional anesthesia and other techniques in the management of breast surgery. Locoregional techniques are superior in reducing pain in the first hour after mastectomy.

scholarly journals How Well can Your Smartphone Measure What you eat, Drink and Smoke? A Systematic Review of the Measurement Properties of Smartphone Approaches to Assess Diet, Alcohol use and Tobacco use. (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Thornton
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Alcohol Use ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Health Behaviours ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Measurement Approach

BACKGROUND Poor diet, alcohol use and tobacco smoking have been identified as strong determinants of chronic disease, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancers. Smartphones have the potential to provide a real-time, pervasive, unobtrusive and cost-effective way to measure these health behaviours and deliver instant feedback to users. Despite this, the validity of using smartphones to measure these behaviours is largely unknown. OBJECTIVE The aim of our review was to identify existing smartphone—based approaches to measure these health behaviours and critically appraise the quality of their measurement properties. METHODS We conducted a systematic search of the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase (Elsevier), Cochrane Library (Wiley), PsychINFO (EBSCOhost), CINAHL (EBSCOHost), Web of Science (Clarivate), SPORTDiscus (EBSCOhost), and IEEE Xplore Digital Library databases in March 2020. Studies that were written in English, reported measuring diet, alcohol use and/or tobacco use via a smartphone, and reported on at least one measurement property (eg validity, reliability and/or responsiveness) were eligible. Outcomes were summarised in a narrative synthesis. This systematic review is registered with PROSPERO, identifier CRD42019122242. RESULTS Of 12,261 records, 72 studies describing the measurement properties of smartphone—based approaches to measure diet (n=48), alcohol use (n=16) and tobacco use (n=8) were identified and included in the current review. Across the health behaviours, 18 different measurement techniques were used within smartphones. The measurement properties most commonly examined were construct validity, measurement error and criterion validity. Results varied by behaviour and measurement approach and the methodological quality of studies varied widely. Most studies investigating the measurement of diet and alcohol received ‘very good’ or ‘adequate’ methodological quality ratings (72.9%, 35/48, and 68.8%, 11/16, respectively), while only one study (12.5%, 1/8) investigating the measurement of tobacco use received a ‘very good’ or ‘adequate’ rating. CONCLUSIONS This review is the first to bring together evidence regarding the different types of smartphone—based approaches currently used to measure key behavioural risk factors for chronic disease (diet, alcohol use and tobacco use) and the quality of their measurement properties. Nineteen measurement techniques were identified, the majority of which assessed dietary behaviours (67%, n=48/72). Some evidence exists to support the reliability and validity of using smartphones to assess these behaviours, however results varied by behaviour and measurement approach. The methodological quality of included studies also varied. Overall, more high-quality studies validating smartphone based approaches against criterion measures are needed. More research investigating the use of smartphones to assess alcohol and tobacco use, and objective measurement approaches is also needed. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT RR2-https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01375-w

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document