Systematic review of measurement properties of self-reported instruments for evaluating therapeutic communication

A systematic review was carried out to examine measurement tools of therapeutic relational communication, using an electronic search of the following databases: PubMed, LILACS, CINAHL, CiberIndex, Scielo and Scopus. The project followed the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and the protocol recommended by the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) panel. Thirteen instruments were included in the review. and their measurement properties were tested. The most common communication elements found in the measuring instruments were: empathy, respect, listening, contact, communicative competence, communication quality, and communication skills. Studies that used a theoretical foundation were based on patient-centered humanistic models. Empathy, respect, controlled contact, and other basic elements of interpersonal communication were most commonly found among the measuring regents. In conclusion, this review analyzed the theoretical foundations of the components of instruments used to measure therapeutic relational communication in the nursing field.

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

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

PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENTS: CONCEPTUAL BASIS AND EVALUATION METHODS - PART II

Texto & Contexto - Enfermagem ◽

10.1590/1980-265x-tce-2017-0311 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 28 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Maria Elena Echevarría-Guanilo ◽

Natália Gonçalves ◽

Priscila Juceli Romanoski

Keyword(s):

Patient Reported Outcomes ◽

Theoretical Study ◽

Criterion Validity ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Measuring Instruments ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Selection Of

ABSTRACT Objective: to present and discuss conceptual bases and methods for evaluating the content, construct and criterion validity of self-reported measuring instruments. Method: theoretical study based on the concepts of the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and those evaluated in the Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes, which includes concepts of instrument assessment to assess patient-reported outcomes. Results: validity is significant for the methodological quality of an instrument; however, it is a relative criterion, since it depends on the adequacy of the instrument to be measured. There are three different validity measurement properties described in the literature: content, construct and criterion validity. Conclusions: as validity is an important property, it is recommended that it be verified in studies that aimed to develop new scales and in those that adapted and validated for another culture or population.

Download Full-text

Psychometric properties of self-reported financial toxicity measures in cancer survivors: a systematic review protocol using COSMIN methodology

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036365 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (5) ◽

pp. e036365

Author(s):

Zheng Zhu ◽

Weijie Xing ◽

Lucylynn Lizarondo ◽

Jian Peng ◽

Yan Hu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cancer Survivors ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Measurement Properties ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Public Healthcare ◽

Financial Toxicity ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Reported

IntroductionDue to the higher costs associated with advancements in cancer treatment and longer duration of cancer survivorship, increasing financial toxicity has become a great threat to survivors, caregivers and public healthcare systems. Since accurate and reproducible measures are prerequisites for robust results, choosing an acceptable measure with strong psychometric properties to assess financial toxicity is essential. However, a description of the psychometric properties of existing measures is still lacking. The aim of this study is to apply COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology to systematically review the content and structural validity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of financial toxicity for cancer survivors.Methods and analysisPubMed/Medline, Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, and Cochrane Library (Wiley) will be comprehensively searched from database inception to 15 November 2019. Studies that report the measurement properties of PROMs assessing financial toxicity for cancer survivors will be included. The evaluation of measurement properties, data extraction and data synthesis will be conducted according to the COSMIN methodology.Ethics and disseminationNo individual data are involved in this systematic review. The results will be disseminated to a clinical audience and policy-makers though peer-reviewed journals and conferences and will support researchers in choosing the best measure to evaluate the financial toxicity of cancer survivors.

Download Full-text

Risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse: a protocol for a systematic review of validated assessment tools

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021948 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (10) ◽

pp. e021948

Author(s):

Sheila Raposo Galindo ◽

Tatiana de Paula Santana da Silva ◽

Manoel Henrique da Nóbrega Marinho ◽

Carlos Eduardo de Souza Leão Ribeiro ◽

Murilo Duarte da Costa Lima ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cancer Pain ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Opioid Abuse ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Opioid Use ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Registration Number ◽

The Individual

IntroductionOpioid use patterns of individuals with non-cancer pain are influenced by the behavioural dynamics of the individual in managing and properly following the prescription. The use of assessment tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse is important for health professionals who provide care to individuals with non-cancer pain. The aim of the proposed review is to analyse the psychometric properties of tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse in adults with non-cancer pain.Methods and analysisThe review process will be based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. The Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments will be used to analyse the assessment tools. Two independent reviewers will perform the literature search and analysis procedures. Searches will be performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases, and the ‘snowball’ strategy will be employed. The inclusion criteria will be (1) validation studies, (2) assessment tools designed exclusively for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse and (3) assessment tools designed for evaluation of adults with chronic non-cancer pain. The titles and abstracts of the studies retrieved from the databases will be analysed for the preselection of articles, which will be submitted to a full-text analysis to define the final sample. Divergence of opinion between two reviewers will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer.Ethics and disseminationThe review will offer an overview of assessment tools available for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse, which is relevant to reducing the risk of deaths due to abusive consumption and for clinical management of adults with chronic non-cancer pain.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018081577.

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 Youth-to-Parent Aggression: Conceptualization, Typologies, and Instruments

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2020.577757 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 ◽

Author(s):

Izaskun Ibabe

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Family Intervention ◽

Theoretical Background ◽

Measuring Instruments ◽

Assessment Instruments ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Definition Of ◽

The Individual ◽

Selection Of

The goal of this study was to analyze the conceptualization of YPA (youth-to-parent aggression) in relation to terms, definitions, typologies and assessment instruments. To achieve this aim, a systematic review was carried out using the PRISMA protocol. Assessment instruments for YPA were examined in accordance with COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments). After reviewing the literature on conceptualization and measuring instruments, some gaps were found. The use of some particular terms was justified depending on the age of children and severity of case. Taking into account the theoretical background, a full definition of YPA was offered. Moreover, this study revealed that it was possible to discriminate four typologies of YPA (Offensive, Defensive, Affective, and Situational) as a function of the coercion level and nature of the violence. Eleven instruments to measure YPA were analyzed exhaustively, with the most reported and robust psychometric properties being internal consistency and structural validity, while other validity evidence was understudied. The CPV-Q (12–25 years) obtained the highest rating as a promising instrument. The initial psychodiagnosis of a YPA situation would help in the individual or family intervention, as well as prevent more severe situations of YPA through early intervention.

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

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