Athlete-Reported Outcome Measures for Monitoring Training Responses: A Systematic Review of Risk of Bias and Measurement Property Quality According to the COSMIN Guidelines

Background: Athlete-reported outcome measures (AROMs) are frequently used in research and practice but no studies have examined their psychometric properties. Objectives: Part 1—identify the most commonly used AROMs in sport for monitoring training responses; part 2—assess risk of bias, measurement properties, and level of evidence, based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: Methodological quality of the studies, quality of measurement properties, and level of evidence were determined using the COSMIN checklist and criteria. Results: Part 1—from 9446 articles screened for title and abstract, 310 out of 334 full texts were included; 53.9% of the AROMs contained multiple items, while 46.1% contained single items. Part 2—from 1895 articles screened for title and abstract, 71 were selected. Most measurement properties of multiple-item AROMs were adequate, but content validity and measurement error were inadequate. With the exclusion of 2 studies examining reliability and responsiveness, no validity studies were found for single items. Conclusions: The measurement properties of multiple-item AROMs derived from psychometrics were acceptable (with the exclusion of content validity and measurement error). The single-item AROMs most frequently used in sport science have not been validated. Additionally, nonvalidated modified versions of the originally nonvalidated items are common. Until proper validation studies are completed, all conclusions based on these AROMs are questionable. Established reference methods, such as those of clinimetrics, should be used to develop and assess the validity of AROMs.

Download Full-text

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

Systematic Reviews ◽

10.1186/s13643-019-1240-0 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 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

Download Full-text

Outcome measures evaluating physical functioning and their measurement properties in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034286 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (4) ◽

pp. e034286 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Samia Alamrani ◽

Alison Rushton ◽

Adrian Gardner ◽

Deborah Falla ◽

Nicola R Heneghan

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽

Idiopathic Scoliosis ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Physical Functioning ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Reported

IntroductionPhysical functioning (PF) is the ability to carry out the physical activity of daily living. It is an important outcome that provides a meaningful evaluation of individuals’ life. PF can be assessed using patient-reported outcome measures, performance-based outcome measures or body structure and function measure. Measures need to be valid, reliable and responsive to change to evaluate the effects of an intervention. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common deformity among the paediatric population and impacts on individuals’ lives. This systematic review will appraise evidence on the measurement properties of PF tools in individuals with AIS.Methods/analysisA protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis informed by Cochrane guidelines is reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-P. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTdiscus, Web of Science and PubMed will be searched in two stages, from inception until December 2019. Search 1 will inventory all studies that assessed PF in participants with AIS, without any limitations. The search terms will be scoliosis, adolescent and PF-related terms. Search 2 will include studies which investigated instrument measurement properties in the same population for measures identified in search one. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and overall quality assessment. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias and a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines will be used. A meta-analysis will be conducted if possible, or the evidence will be synthesised and summarised per measurement property per outcome measure per measurement type.Ethics and disseminationThis review will provide recommendations for practice and future research, considering psychometric properties of outcome measures of PF in AIS. The results of this study will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentation.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019142335.

Download Full-text

Tools to assess the measurement properties of quality of life instruments: a meta-review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036038 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (8) ◽

pp. e036038

Author(s):

Sonia Lorente ◽

Carme Viladrich ◽

Jaume Vives ◽

Josep-Maria Losilla

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Meta Review ◽

Methodological Guidelines

ObjectiveThis meta-review aims to discuss the methodological, research and practical applications of tools that assess the measurement properties of instruments evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) that have been reported in systematic reviews.DesignMeta-review.MethodsElectronic search from January 2008 to May 2020 was carried out on PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, WoS, Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) database, Google Scholar and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.ResultsA total of 246 systematic reviews were assessed. Concerning the quality of the review process, some methodological shortcomings were found, such as poor compliance with reporting or methodological guidelines. Regarding the procedures to assess the quality of measurement properties, 164 (66.6%) of reviewers applied one tool at least. Tool format and structure differed across standards or scientific traditions (ie, psychology, medicine and economics), but most assess both measurement properties and the usability of instruments. As far as the results and conclusions of systematic reviews are concerned, only 68 (27.5%) linked the intended use of the instrument to specific measurement properties (eg, evaluative use to responsiveness).ConclusionsThe reporting and methodological quality of reviews have increased over time, but there is still room for improvement regarding adherence to guidelines. The COSMIN would be the most widespread and comprehensive tool to assess both the risk of bias of primary studies, and the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments for evaluative purposes. Our analysis of other assessment tools and measurement standards can serve as a starting point for future lines of work on the COSMIN tool, such as considering a more comprehensive evaluation of feasibility, including burden and fairness; expanding its scope for measurement instruments with a different use than evaluative; and improving its assessment of the risk of bias of primary studies.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017065232.

Download Full-text

Treatment Outcome Measurement Instruments for Port Wine Stains: A Systematic Review of Their Measurement Properties

Dermatology ◽

10.1159/000511438 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-17

Author(s):

M. Ingmar van Raath ◽

Sandeep Chohan ◽

Albert Wolkerstorfer ◽

Chantal M.A.M. van der Horst ◽

Jacqueline Limpens ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Content Validity ◽

Outcome Measurement ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Minimal Important Change ◽

Port Wine ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Reported

Background: A plethora of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) are being used in port wine stain (PWS) studies. It is currently unclear how valid, responsive, and reliable these are. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to appraise the content validity and other measurement properties of OMIs for PWS treatment to identify the most appropriate instruments and future research priorities. Methods: This study was performed using the updated Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology and adhered to PRISMA guidelines. Comprehensive searches in Medline and Embase were performed. Studies in which an OMI for PWS patients was developed or its measurement properties were evaluated were included. Two investigators independently extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies and instruments to perform qualitative synthesis of the evidence. Results: In total, 1,034 articles were screened, and 77 full-text articles were reviewed. A total of 8 studies were included that reported on 6 physician-reported OMIs of clinical improvement and 6 parent- or patient-reported OMIs of life impact, of which 3 for health-related quality of life and 1 for perceived stigmatization. Overall, the quality of OMI development was inadequate (63%) or doubtful (37%). Each instrument has undergone a very limited evaluation in PWS patients. No content validity studies were performed. The quality of evidence for content validity was very low (78%), low (15%), or moderate (7%), with sufficient comprehensibility, mostly sufficient comprehensiveness, and mixed relevance. No studies on responsiveness, minimal important change, and cross-cultural validity were retrieved. There was moderate- to very low-quality evidence for sufficient inter-rater reliability for some clinical PWS OMIs. Internal consistency and measurement error were indeterminate in all studies. Conclusions: There was insufficient evidence to properly guide outcome selection. Additional assessment of the measurement properties of OMIs is needed, preferentially guided by a core domain set tailored to PWS.

Download Full-text

Measurement Properties of the Craniocervical Flexion Test: A Systematic Review

Physical Therapy ◽

10.1093/ptj/pzaa072 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 100 (7) ◽

pp. 1094-1117 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Francisco Xavier de Araujo ◽

Giovanni E Ferreira ◽

Maurício Scholl Schell ◽

Marcelo Peduzzi de Castro ◽

Daniel Cury Ribeiro ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Convergent Validity ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Measurement Property ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Flexor Muscles ◽

Flexion Test

Abstract Objective Patients with neck pain commonly have altered activity of the neck muscles. The craniocervical flexion test (CCFT) is used to assess the function of the deep neck flexor muscles in patients with musculoskeletal neck disorders. Systematic reviews summarizing the measurement properties of the CCFT are outdated. The objective of this study was to systematically review the measurement properties of the CCFT for assessing the deep neck flexor muscles. Methods The data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Science Direct were searched in April 2019. Studies of any design that reported at least 1 measurement property of the CCFT for assessing the deep neck flexor muscles were selected. Two reviewers independently extracted data and rated the risk of bias of individual studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk-of-bias checklist. The overall rating for each measurement property was classified as “positive,” “indeterminate,” or “negative.” The overall rating was accompanied with a level of evidence. Results Fourteen studies were included in the data synthesis. The ratings were positive, and the level of evidence was moderate for interrater and intrarater reliability and convergent validity. There was conflicting rating and level of evidence for discriminative validity. Measurement error was indeterminate, with an unknown level of evidence. Responsiveness was negative, with a limited level of evidence. A limitation of this study was that only papers published in English were included. Conclusions The CCFT is a valid and reliable test that can be used in clinical practice as an assessment test. Because of the conflicting and low-quality evidence, caution is advised when using the CCFT as a discriminative test and as an outcome measure. Future better-designed studies are warranted.

Download Full-text

Outcomes evaluating quality of life and their measurement properties in early-onset scoliosis: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048956 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (9) ◽

pp. e048956

Author(s):

Charles Baird ◽

James Archer ◽

Adrian Gardner ◽

Alison B Rushton ◽

Nicola R Heneghan

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Early Onset ◽

The Body ◽

Early Onset Scoliosis ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Measurement Property ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Reported

IntroductionEarly-onset scoliosis (EOS) is a rare spinal deformity affecting children under the age of 10. Both the condition and its treatment have associated morbidity and can impact quality of life. Understanding this impact can be achieved by using appropriate patient-reported and/or carer-reported outcome measures. The aim of the review described in this protocol is to evaluate the evidence on measurement properties relevant to health-related quality of life outcomes in the EOS population. The focus will be on outcome measures relevant to patients undergoing treatment of EOS under the age of 10.Methods/analysisThis protocol is reported in line with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, PubMed, PsychINFO and CINAHL databases will be searched using a two-stage search strategy. The first stage will identify measures of HRQoL used in EOS through screening of titles and abstracts. The second stage will assess the measurement properties of those measures identified through screening of full-text articles. The measurement properties of interest are the ‘reliability’, ‘validity’ and ‘responsiveness’ of the instrument. Only English language articles will be considered. Two reviewers will independently review the search results against the eligibility criteria, perform data extraction and assess for risk of bias, with disputes handled by a third reviewer. Data will be quantitatively pooled where possible or reported as a narrative synthesis. The summarised results for each measurement property will be rated against the criteria for good measurement properties following the COSMIN methodology. Two reviewers will assess the body of evidence for each measurement property using modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for this review and the results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed publications.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020219721.

Download Full-text

The German RECAP questionnaire: linguistic validation and cognitive debriefing in German adults with self-reported atopic eczema and parents of affected children

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes ◽

10.1186/s41687-021-00285-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Michaela Gabes ◽

Christina Tischer ◽

Anne Herrmann ◽

Laura Howells ◽

Christian Apfelbacher

Keyword(s):

Atopic Eczema ◽

Content Validity ◽

Qualitative Content Analysis ◽

Recall Period ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

German Population ◽

German Version ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Response Options ◽

Patient Reported

Abstract Background Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) assessing eczema control. Long-term control of eczema is one of the four core outcome domains for atopic eczema trials. This instrument has been recently developed in the UK. Objective This study aimed to translate the English RECAP into German and test its content validity in a German population with self-reported atopic eczema. Methods A six-step procedure including two forward and one backward translations, two consensus decisions and an expert review was performed to obtain a German version of RECAP. We conducted semi-standardized cognitive interviews with adults with atopic eczema (n = 7) and parents having children affected by this disease (n = 5). A “think-aloud” method was used and aspects of comprehensibility, comprehensiveness and relevance according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria were examined. Interviews were coded using qualitative content analysis. Results No particular linguistic problems were encountered during forward-backward translation. Minor wording changes were made as required. The title was adjusted to a more familiar German term of the disease (which is ‘Neurodermitis’). The recall period was rephrased from ‘over the last week’ to ‘over the last seven days’ since there was a different cultural understanding of the time frame. Regarding content validity, the items of the German RECAP were considered to be comprehensible, comprehensive and relevant for the participants and parents of affected children. The participants understood the instruction and considered the one-week recall period and the response options as appropriate. Conclusions A German version of RECAP that is linguistically equivalent to the original version is now available but further assessment of its measurement properties is needed.

Download Full-text

Psychometric Testing of the Spanish Modified Version of the Mini-Suffering State Examination

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18157821 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (15) ◽

pp. 7821

Author(s):

Daniel Gutiérrez-Sánchez ◽

Rafael Gómez-García ◽

Isabel María López-Medina ◽

Antonio I. Cuesta-Vargas

Keyword(s):

Internal Consistency ◽

Content Validity ◽

Convergent Validity ◽

Informal Caregivers ◽

Psychometric Testing ◽

Spanish Version ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Quality Of Dying ◽

State Examination

Background: The mini-suffering state examination is a valid and reliable measure that have been used to assess suffering in patients with advanced cancer. The aim of this study was to carry out a psychometric analysis of the Spanish version of the mini-suffering state examination. Method: A validation study was conducted. Seventy-two informal caregivers of deceased patients in palliative care were included in this study. A psychometric testing of content validity, internal consistency, and convergent validity with the Spanish version of the quality of dying and death questionnaire was performed. Results: The original instrument was modified to be used by informal caregivers. The content validity was acceptable (0.96), and the internal consistency was moderate (α = 0.67). Convergent validity was demonstrated (r = −0.64). Conclusion: The Spanish modified version of the MSSE showed satisfactory measurement properties. The Spanish modified version of MSSE can be useful to facilitate screening, monitor progress, and guide treatment decisions in end-of-life cancer patients.

Download Full-text

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

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042325 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes ◽

10.1186/s41687-019-0159-5 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 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.

Download Full-text