Effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review protocol

IntroductionType 2 diabetes is a global health priority. People with diabetes are more likely to experience mental health problems relative to people without diabetes. Diabetes guidelines recommend assessment of depression and diabetes distress during diabetes care. This systematic review will examine the effect of routinely assessing and addressing depression and diabetes distress using patient-reported outcome measures in improving outcomes among adults with type 2 diabetes.Methods and analysisMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycInfo, The Cochrane Library and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched using a prespecified strategy using a prespecified Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes, Setting and study design strategy. The date range of the search of all databases will be from inception to 3 August 2020. Randomised controlled trials, interrupted time-series studies, prospective and retrospective cohort studies, case–control studies and analytical cross-sectional studies published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language will be included. Two review authors will independently screen abstracts and full texts with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer, if required, using Covidence software. Two reviewers will undertake risk of bias assessment using checklists appropriate to study design. Data will be extracted using prespecified template. A narrative synthesis will be conducted, with a meta-analysis, if appropriate.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this review of published studies. Presentation of results will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020200246.

Download Full-text

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Registry-Based Studies of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review

Current Diabetes Reports ◽

10.1007/s11892-019-1265-8 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 19 (11) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Yu Ting Chen ◽

Yan Zhi Tan ◽

Mcvin Cheen ◽

Hwee-Lin Wee

Keyword(s):

Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Patient Reported

Download Full-text

Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review

Journal of Medical Internet Research ◽

10.2196/25002 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (8) ◽

pp. e25002

Author(s):

Priscilla Jia Ling Wee ◽

Yu Heng Kwan ◽

Dionne Hui Fang Loh ◽

Jie Kie Phang ◽

Troy H Puar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Patient Reported

Background The management of diabetes is complex. There is growing recognition of the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as a standardized method of obtaining an outlook on patients’ functional status and well-being. However, no systematic reviews have summarized the studies that investigate the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs. Objective Our aims were to conduct a systematic review of studies investigating the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs by evaluating the methodological quality and overall level of evidence of these PROMs and to categorize them based on the outcome measures assessed. Methods This study was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Relevant articles were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases. The PROMs were evaluated with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines. Results A total of 363 articles evaluating the measurement properties of PROMs for diabetes in the adult population were identified, of which 238 unique PROMs from 248 studies reported in 209 articles were validated in the type 2 diabetes population. PROMs with at least a moderate level of evidence for ≥5 of 9 measurement properties include the Chinese version of the Personal Diabetes Questionnaire (C-PDQ), Diabetes Self-Management Instrument Short Form (DSMI-20), and Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale in Hong Kong primary care patients (C-ITAS-HK), of which the C-PDQ has a “sufficient (+)” rating for >4 measurement properties. A total of 43 PROMs meet the COSMIN guidelines for recommendation for use. Conclusions This study identified and synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of 238 unique PROMs for patients with type 2 diabetes and categorized the PROMs according to their outcome measures. These findings may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting appropriate high-quality PROMs for clinical practice and research. Trial Registration PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020180978; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020180978.

Download Full-text

Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review (Preprint)

10.2196/preprints.25002 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Priscilla Jia Ling Wee ◽

Yu Heng Kwan ◽

Dionne Hui Fang Loh ◽

Jie Kie Phang ◽

Troy H Puar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Outcome Measures ◽

Systematic Reviews ◽

Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Level Of Evidence ◽

Patient Reported

BACKGROUND The management of diabetes is complex. There is growing recognition of the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as a standardized method of obtaining an outlook on patients’ functional status and well-being. However, no systematic reviews have summarized the studies that investigate the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs. OBJECTIVE Our aims were to conduct a systematic review of studies investigating the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs by evaluating the methodological quality and overall level of evidence of these PROMs and to categorize them based on the outcome measures assessed. METHODS This study was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Relevant articles were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases. The PROMs were evaluated with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines. RESULTS A total of 363 articles evaluating the measurement properties of PROMs for diabetes in the adult population were identified, of which 238 unique PROMs from 248 studies reported in 209 articles were validated in the type 2 diabetes population. PROMs with at least a moderate level of evidence for ≥5 of 9 measurement properties include the Chinese version of the Personal Diabetes Questionnaire (C-PDQ), Diabetes Self-Management Instrument Short Form (DSMI-20), and Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale in Hong Kong primary care patients (C-ITAS-HK), of which the C-PDQ has a “sufficient (+)” rating for >4 measurement properties. A total of 43 PROMs meet the COSMIN guidelines for recommendation for use. CONCLUSIONS This study identified and synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of 238 unique PROMs for patients with type 2 diabetes and categorized the PROMs according to their outcome measures. These findings may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting appropriate high-quality PROMs for clinical practice and research. CLINICALTRIAL PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020180978; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020180978.

Download Full-text