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

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. e022829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Lorente ◽  
Jaume Vives ◽  
Carme Viladrich ◽  
Josep-Maria Losilla
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Bibliographic Databases ◽  
Measurement Standards ◽  
Meta Review ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionUsing specific tools to assess the measurement properties of health status instruments is recommended both to standardise the review process and to improve the methodological quality of systematic reviews. However, depending on the measurement standards on which these tools are developed, the approach to appraise the measurement properties of instruments may vary. For this reason, the present meta-review aims to: (1) identify systematic reviews assessing the measurement properties of instruments evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL); (2) identify the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (3) describe the characteristics of the tools applied to assess the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments; (4) identify the measurement standards on which these tools were developed or conform to and (5) compare the similarities and differences among the identified measurement standards.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols Guidelines. Electronic search will be carried out on bibliographic databases, including PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Psychological Information, SCOPUS, Web of Science, COSMIN database and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, being limited by time (2008–2018) and language (English). Descriptive analyses of different aspects of tools applied to evaluate the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments will be presented; the different measurement standards will be described and some recommendations about the methodological and research applications will be made.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. The results will be disseminated by its publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017065232

scholarly journals Patient Reported Outcome Measures Assessing Health-Related Quality Of Life in Dupuytren´S Disease: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (01) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Gómez Herrero ◽  
Rafael Sanjuan-Cerveró ◽  
Pedro Vazquez-Ferreiro ◽  
Francisco Javier Carrera-Hueso ◽  
Marina Sáez-Belló ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Objective: The objective of this study is to carry out a systematic review of the outcome measures reported by the patient that are used to measure the quality of life of patients with Dupuytren´s disease (DD), assessing their relevance and effectiveness. Methods: A systematic literature search was carried out in the PubMed®, Web of Sciencie®, SciELO®, EMBASE®, Google Scholar® and Cochrane® databases. We searched for peer-reviewed articles evaluating health related quality of life (HR-QoL) in patients with DD diagnosed and/or treated until April 1, 2017, for English or Spanish language. The following keywords were used: “Dupuytren´s disease (MeSH)” AND “health related quality of life (MeSH)”. The documents were eligible for inclusion if they described data on the HR-QoL domains in relation to diagnosis or treatment of DD after a revision process by two independent authors. The checklist (STROBE) was used to evaluate the quality of the works. Results: From 352 identified articles were finally selected 26 studies in the systematic review, mostly European. A total of nine outcomes measures specifically reported by the patient were identified: DASH (used in 13 of the 26 selected studies), Quick-DASH (8/26), MHQ (7/26), briefMHQ (1/26), URAM (4/26), POS-HAND/ARM (1/26), SDSS (1/26), DDSP (1/26) and CHFS (1/26) questionnaires. We analyze their quantitative results to evaluate the effectiveness and evaluate the methodological quality of the studies on the measurement properties of the results reported by patients related to health. Conclusion: More work is urgently needed in these areas before we can reach a consensus on which instrument is the best to assess functional deterioration and improvement in patients with DD.

scholarly journals Evaluating measures of quality of life in adult scoliosis: a protocol for a systematic review and narrative synthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Archer ◽  
Charles Baird ◽  
Adrian Gardner ◽  
Alison B. Rushton ◽  
Nicola R. Heneghan
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Adult Scoliosis ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Narrative Synthesis

Abstract Background Adult scoliosis represents a distinct subgroup of scoliosis patients for whom the diagnosis can have a large impact on their health-related quality of life (HR-QOL). Therefore, HR-QOL patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are essential to assess disease progression and the impact of interventions. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the measurement properties of HR-QOL PROMs in adult scoliosis patients. Methods We will conduct a literature search, from their inception onwards, of multiple electronic databases including AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO and PubMed. The searches will be performed in two stages. For both stages of the search, participants will be aged 18 and over with a diagnosis of scoliosis. The primary outcome of interest in the stage one searches will be studies which use PROMs to investigate HR-QOL as defined by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy, the secondary outcome will be to assess the frequency of use of the various PROMs. In stage two, the primary outcome of interest will be studies which assess the measurement properties of the HR-QOL PROMs identified in stage one. No specific measurement property will be given priority. No planned secondary outcomes have been identified but will be reported if discovered. In stage one, the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of systematic reviews. In Stage two the only restriction on study design will be the exclusion of full-text articles not available in the English language. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The study methodological quality (or risk of bias) will be appraised using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. The overall strength of the body of evidence will then be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. A narrative synthesis will be provided with information presented in the main text and tables to summarise and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. The narrative synthesis will explore the evidence for currently used PROMs in adult scoliosis patients and any areas that require further study. Discussion The review will help clinicians and researchers identify a HR-QOL PROM for use in patients with adult scoliosis. Findings from the review will be published and disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations. Systematic review registration This systematic review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), reference number: CRD42020219437

scholarly journals Measuring health-related quality of life in colorectal cancer patients: systematic review of measurement properties of the EORTC QLQ-CR29

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 2395-2412
Author(s):  
Anja van der Hout ◽  
Koen I. Neijenhuijs ◽  
Femke Jansen ◽  
Cornelia F. van Uden-Kraan ◽  
Neil K. Aaronson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
Colorectal Cancer Patients

scholarly journals Comparison of health-related quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation treated with catheter ablation or antiarrhythmic drug therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e017577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine S Allan ◽  
Shaunattonie Henry ◽  
Theresa Aves ◽  
Laura Banfield ◽  
J Charles Victor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Review Protocol

IntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most prevalent cardiac arrhythmia and causes patients considerable burden; symptoms such as palpitations and dyspnoea are common, leading to frequent emergency room visits. Patients with AF report reduced health-related quality of life (HQOL) compared with the general population; thus, treatments focus on the restoration of sinus rhythm to improve symptoms. Catheter ablation (CA) is a primary treatment strategy to treat AF-related burden in select patient populations; however, repeat procedures are often needed, there is a risk of major complications and the procedure is quite costly in comparison to medical therapy. As the outcomes after CA are mixed, an updated review that synthesises the available literature, on outcomes that matter to patients, is needed so that patients and their healthcare providers can make quality treatment decisions. The purpose of this review protocol is to extend previous findings by systematically analysing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of CA in patients with AF and using meta-analytic techniques to identify the benefits and risks of CA with respect to HQOL and AF-related symptoms.Methods and analysisWe will include all RCTs that compare CA with antiarrhythmic drugs, or radiofrequency CA with cryoballoon CA, in patients with paroxysmal or persistent AF. To locate studies we will perform comprehensive electronic database searches from database inception to 4 April 2017, with no language restrictions. We will conduct a quantitative synthesis of the effect of CA on HQOL as well as AF-related symptoms and the number of CA procedures needed for success, using meta-analytic techniques.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical issues are foreseen and ethical approval is not required given that this is a protocol. The findings of the study will be reported at national and international conferences, and in a peer-reviewed journal using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.Trial registration numberIn accordance with the guidelines, our systematic review protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on 6 March 2017 and was last updated on 6 March 2017 (registration number CRD42017057427).Protocol amendmentsAny protocol amendments will be documented on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and in the final manuscript and indicated as such.

Disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires for heart failure: a systematic review with meta-analyses

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olatz Garin ◽  
Montse Ferrer ◽  
Àngels Pont ◽  
Montserrat Rué ◽  
Anna Kotzeva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Disease Specific ◽  
Specific Health

scholarly journals Community-based non-pharmacological interventions for improving pain, disability and quality of life in pregnant women with musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review with meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042107
Author(s):  
Chinonso N Igwesi-Chidobe ◽  
Grace Nneoma Emmanuel ◽  
Obinna Chinedu Okezue
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Pharmacological Interventions ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Musculoskeletal Conditions ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionTwenty five per cent of pregnant women with musculoskeletal pain have disabling symptoms that negatively influence quality of life. Studies have reported varying effects of non-pharmacological interventions including exercise, manipulation and pelvic belts for pregnant women with musculoskeletal problems. The overall effectiveness and acceptability of these interventions is uncertain due to lack of synthesised evidence. This protocol is for the first systematic review of community-based non-pharmacological interventions for improving pain, disability and quality of life in pregnant women with musculoskeletal conditions from studies published until August 2020.Methods and analysisA detailed search of PubMed, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Global Index Medicus, African Index Medicus, African Journal Online, Western Pacific Region Index Medicus, Latin American and Caribbean Centre on Health Science Information, Index Medicus for South-East Asia Region, IRIS (WHO digital publications), British Library for Development Studies and Google Scholar. Additional studies will be located from the reference list of identified studies and relevant systematic reviews. The databases will be searched from inception to August 2020. Appraisal of study quality will be performed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Data will be synthesised using a mixed-studies synthesis design—the convergent synthesis. The description of interventions in all study designs will be summarised narratively. Meta-analyses will be used to statistically summarise the effectiveness of interventions in randomised controlled trials and the factors that influence these. Other quantitative studies will be summarised narratively to answer the objectives. Thematic synthesis will be used to summarise results of qualitative studies. The outcomes of interest include pain, disability and quality of life. This paper is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols 2015 guidelines.Ethics and disseminationEthical clearance is not required. Findings will be presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020189535.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document