Measurement properties of the craniocervical flexion test: a systematic review protocol

IntroductionNeck pain is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide and it accounts for high economic and societal burden. Altered activation of the neck muscles is a common musculoskeletal impairment presented by patients with neck pain. The craniocervical flexion test with pressure biofeedback unit has been widely used in clinical practice to assess function of deep neck flexor muscles. This systematic review will assess the measurement properties of the craniocervical flexion test for assessing deep cervical flexor muscles.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a systematic review that will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, PEDro, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus and Science Direct will be systematically searched from inception. Studies of any design that have investigated and reported at least one measurement property of the craniocervical flexion test for assessing the deep cervical flexor muscles will be included. All measurement properties will be considered as outcomes. Two reviewers will independently rate the risk of bias of individual studies using the updated COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments risk of bias checklist. A structured narrative synthesis will be used for data analysis. Quantitative findings for each measurement property will be summarised. The overall rating for a measurement property will be classified as ‘positive’, ‘indeterminate’ or ‘negative’. The overall rating will be accompanied with a level of evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval and patient consent are not required since this is a systematic review based on published studies. Findings will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017062175.

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

Measures of central sensitisation and their measurement properties in the adult musculoskeletal trauma population: a protocol for a systematic review and data synthesis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023204 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (3) ◽

pp. e023204 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Nicola Middlebrook ◽

Alison B Rushton ◽

Nicola R Heneghan ◽

Deborah Falla

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Central Sensitisation ◽

Trauma Population ◽

Musculoskeletal Trauma

IntroductionPain following musculoskeletal trauma is common with poor outcomes and disability well documented. Pain is complex in nature and can include the four primary mechanisms of pain: nociceptive, neuropathic, inflammatory and central sensitisation (CS). CS can be measured in multiple ways; however, no systematic review has evaluated the measurement properties of such measures in the musculoskeletal trauma population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the measurement properties of current measures of CS in this population.Methods/analysisThis protocol is informed and reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis-P. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar as well as key journals and grey literature will be searched in two stages to (1) identify what measures are being used to assess CS in this population and (2) evaluate the measurement properties of the identified measures. Two independent reviewers will conduct the search, extract the data, assess risk of bias for included studies and assess overall quality. The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments Risk of Bias Checklist and a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines will be used. Meta-analysis will be conducted if deemed appropriate. Alternatively, a narrative synthesis will be conducted and summarised per measurement property per outcome measure.Ethics and disseminationThis review will aid clinicians in using the most appropriate tool for assessing central sensitisation in this population and is the first step towards a more standardised approach in pain assessment. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal and presented at conferences.PROSPERO registrationnumberCRD42018091531.

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

Measuring the teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations: a systematic review of assessment tools and their measurement properties

BMJ Quality & Safety ◽

10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008260 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 28 (4) ◽

pp. 327-337 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Sylvain Boet ◽

Nicole Etherington ◽

Sarah Larrigan ◽

Li Yin ◽

Hira Khan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Data Extraction ◽

Educational Interventions ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Cosmin Checklist ◽

Crisis Situations

BackgroundEducational interventions to improve teamwork in crisis situations have proliferated in recent years with substantial variation in teamwork measurement. This systematic review aimed to synthesise available tools and their measurement properties in order to identify the most robust tool for measuring the teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations.MethodsSearches were conducted in Embase (via OVID), PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Education Resources Information Center, Medline and Medline In-Process (via OVID) (through 12 January 2017). Studies evaluating the measurement properties of teamwork assessment tools for teams in clinical or simulated crisis situations were included. Two independent reviewers screened studies based on predetermined criteria and completed data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.ResultsThe search yielded 1822 references. Twenty studies were included, representing 13 assessment tools. Tools were primarily assessed in simulated resuscitation scenarios for emergency department teams. The Team Emergency Assessment Measure (TEAM) had the most validation studies (n=5), which demonstrated three sources of validity (content, construct and concurrent) and three sources of reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater reliability and test–retest reliability). Most studies of TEAM’s measurement properties were at no risk of bias.ConclusionsA number of tools are available for assessing teamwork performance of teams in crisis situations. Although selection will ultimately depend on the user’s context, TEAM may be the most promising tool given its measurement evidence. Currently, there is a lack of tools to assess teamwork performance during intraoperative crisis situations. Additional research is needed in this regard.

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

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess sleep in postpartum women using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines

SLEEP ◽

10.1093/sleep/zsab128 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

P Sultan ◽

K Ando ◽

E Sultan ◽

J Hawkins ◽

L Blake ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Postpartum Women ◽

Measurement Property ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Class A ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Psychometric Measurement

Abstract Study Objectives We performed a systematic review to identify the best patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of postpartum sleep in women. Methods We searched 4 databases for validated PROMs used to assess postpartum sleep. Studies were considered if they evaluated at least 1 psychometric measurement property of a PROM. An overall rating was assigned for each psychometric measurement property of each PROM based upon COSMIN criteria. A modified GRADE approach was used to assess the level of evidence and recommendations were then made for each PROM. Results We identified 15 validation studies of 8 PROMs, in 9,070 postpartum women. An adequate number of sleep domains was assessed by 5 PROMs: Bergen Insomnia Scale (BIS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), General Sleep Disturbance Scale (GSDS), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS) and the Sleep Symptom Checklist (SSC). BIS and GSDS were the only PROMs to demonstrate adequate content validity and at least a low level of evidence of sufficient internal consistency, resulting in Class A recommendations. The BIS was the only PROM, which is easily accessible and free to use for non-commercial research, that achieved a Class A recommendation. Conclusion The BIS is the best currently available PROM of postpartum sleep. However, this PROM fails to assess several important domains such as sleep duration (and efficiency), chronotype, sleep-disordered breathing and medication usage. Future studies should focus on evaluating the psychometric measurement properties of BIS in the North American setting and in different cultural groups, or to develop a more specific PROM of postpartum sleep.

Download Full-text

Risk of colectomy after conservative treatment of diverticulitis of the left hemicolon complicated by abdominal or pelvic abscess: protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042350 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (12) ◽

pp. e042350

Author(s):

Maximilian Sohn ◽

Ayman Agha ◽

Igors Iesalnieks ◽

Anna Tiefes ◽

Alfred Hochrein ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Emergency Surgery ◽

Case Reports ◽

Acute Diverticulitis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Series ◽

Pelvic Abscess ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Review Manager

IntroductionAcute diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon is increasingly treated by a non-operative approach. The need for colectomy after recovery from a flare of acute diverticulitis of the left colon, complicated diverticular abscess is still controversial. The primary aim of this study is to assess the risk of interval emergency surgery by systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods and analysisThe systematic review and meta-analysis will be conducted in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement. PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and EMBASE will be screened for the predefined searching term: (Diverticulitis OR Diverticulum) AND (Abscess OR pelvic abscess OR pericolic abscess OR intraabdominal abscess) AND (surgery OR operation OR sigmoidectomy OR drainage OR percutaneous drainage OR conservative therapy OR watchful waiting). All studies published in an English or German-speaking peer-reviewed journal will be suitable for this analysis. Case reports, case series of less than five patients, studies without follow-up information, systematic and non-systematic reviews and meta-analyses will be excluded. Primary endpoint is the rate of interval emergency surgery. Using the Review Manager Software (Review Manager/RevMan, V.5.3, Copenhagen, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2012) meta-analysis will be pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method for random effects. The Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool will be used to assess methodological quality of non-randomised studies. Risk of bias in randomised studies will be assessed using the Cochrane developed RoB 2-tool.Ethics and disseminationAs no new data are being collected, ethical approval is exempt for this study. This systematic review is to provide a new insight on the need for surgical treatment after a first attack of acute diverticulitis, complicated by intra-abdominal or pelvic abscesses. The results of this study will be presented at national and international meetings and published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020164813.

Download Full-text

Apathy Measures in Older Adults and People with Dementia: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties Using the COSMIN Methodology

Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders ◽

10.1159/000515678 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-13

Author(s):

Clare Burgon ◽

Sarah Elizabeth Goldberg ◽

Veronika van der Wardt ◽

Catherine Brewin ◽

Rowan H. Harwood

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Older Adults ◽

Rating Scale ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Evaluation Procedure ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

People With Dementia ◽

Patient Reported

Background: Apathy is highly prevalent in dementia and is also seen in mild cognitive impairment and the general population. Apathy contributes to failure to undertake daily activities and can lead to health problems or crises. It is therefore important to assess apathy. However, there is currently no gold standard measure of apathy. A comprehensive systematic review of the measurement properties of apathy scales is required. Methods: A systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42018094390). MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched for studies that aimed to develop or assess the validity or reliability of an apathy scale in participants over 65 years, living in the community. A systematic review was conducted in line with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments procedure for reviewing patient-reported outcome measures. The studies’ risk of bias was assessed, and all relevant measurement properties were assessed for quality. Results were pooled and rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation procedure. Results: Fifty-seven publications regarding 18 measures and 39 variations met the eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of individual studies ranged from inadequate to very good and measurement properties ranged from insufficient to sufficient. Similarly, the overall evidence for measurement properties ranged from very low to high quality. The Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) and Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS) had sufficient content validity, reliability, construct validity, and where applicable, structural validity and internal consistency. Conclusion: Numerous scales are available to assess apathy, with varying psychometric properties. The AES and LARS are recommended for measuring apathy in older adults and people living with dementia. The apathy dimension of the commonly used Neuropsychiatric Inventory should be limited to screening for apathy.

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

Comparison of effects of different dietary interventions on cognitive function in Alzheimer’s disease: protocol for systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-042997 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. e042997

Author(s):

Lili Chen ◽

Xinhua Xu ◽

Huizhen Cao ◽

Hong Li

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Alzheimer’S Disease ◽

Alzheimer's Disease ◽

Cognitive Function ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Evaluation Framework ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Cochrane Central Register ◽

Dietary Interventions ◽

Meta Analyses

IntroductionAlzheimer’s disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease and is characterised by cognitive impairment. Non-pharmacological treatments such as diet therapy have been widely investigated in studies on AD. Given the synergistic effects of nutrients present in foods, considering overall dietary composition rather than focusing on a single nutrient may be more useful for evaluating the relationship between diet and AD cognition. The present study aimed to assess the efficacy of different dietary interventions (eg, ketogenic and Mediterranean diets) on cognitive function in patients with AD in a systematic review and pairwise and network meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials or clinical trials.Methods and analysisTwo reviewers will independently conduct searches of PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases. Data will be extracted from selected studies and risk of bias will be assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and evidence quality will be assessed according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The primary outcome of interest is cognitive function in patients with AD; secondary outcomes include biochemical biomarkers of AD and oxidative stress and/or inﬂammatory biomarkers in cerebrospinal fluid or plasma. For each outcome, random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses will be carried out to determine the pooled relative effect of each intervention relative to every other intervention.Ethics and disseminationAs this study is based solely on published literature, no ethics approval is required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Download Full-text