A Systematic Review Evaluating Psychometric Properties of Parent or Caregiver Report Instruments on Child Maltreatment: Part 1: Content Validity

Aims: Child maltreatment (CM) is a serious public health issue, affecting over half of all children globally. Although most CM is perpetrated by parents or caregivers and their reports of CM is more accurate than professionals or children, parent or caregiver report instruments measuring CM have never been systematically evaluated for their content validity, the most important psychometric property. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the content validity of all current parent or caregiver report CM instruments. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Sociological Abstracts; gray literature was retrieved through reference checking. Eligible studies needed to report on content validity of instruments measuring CM perpetrated and reported by parents or caregivers. The quality of studies and content validity of the instruments were evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments guidelines. Results: Fifteen studies reported on the content validity of 15 identified instruments. The study quality was generally poor. The content validity of the instruments was overall sufficient, but most instruments did not provide high-quality evidence for content validity. Conclusions: Most instruments included in this review showed promising content validity. The International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect Child Abuse Screening Tool for use in Trial appears to be the most promising, followed by the Family Maltreatment–Child Abuse criteria. However, firm conclusions cannot be drawn due to the low quality of evidence for content validity. Further studies are required to evaluate the remaining psychometric properties for recommending parent or caregiver report CM instruments.

Download Full-text

A Systematic Review Evaluating Psychometric Properties of Parent or Caregiver Report Instruments on Child Maltreatment: Part 2: Internal Consistency, Reliability, Measurement Error, Structural Validity, Hypothesis Testing, Cross-Cultural Validity, and Criterion Validity

Trauma Violence & Abuse ◽

10.1177/1524838020915591 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 152483802091559

Author(s):

Sangwon Yoon ◽

Renée Speyer ◽

Reinie Cordier ◽

Pirjo Aunio ◽

Airi Hakkarainen

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Child Maltreatment ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Content Validity ◽

Public Health Issue ◽

Global Public Health ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Patient Report Outcome ◽

Psychometric Data

Aims: Child maltreatment (CM) is global public health issue with devastating lifelong consequences. Global organizations have endeavored to eliminate CM; however, there is lack of consensus on what instruments are most suitable for the investigation and prevention of CM. This systematic review aimed to appraise the psychometric properties (other than content validity) of all current parent- or caregiver-reported CM instruments and recommend the most suitable for use. Method: A systematic search of the CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Sociological Abstracts databases was performed. The evaluation of psychometric properties was conducted according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines for systematic reviews of patient-report outcome measures. Responsiveness was beyond the scope of this systematic review, and content validity has been reported on in a companion paper (Part 1). Only instruments developed and published in English were included. Results: Twenty-five studies reported on selected psychometric properties of 15 identified instruments. The methodological quality of the studies was overall adequate. The psychometric properties of the instruments were generally indeterminate or not reported due to incomplete or missing psychometric data; high-quality evidence on the psychometric properties was limited. Conclusions: No instruments could be recommended as most suitable for use in clinic and research. Nine instruments were identified as promising based on current psychometric data but would need further psychometric evidence for them to be recommended.

Download Full-text

Instruments for Measuring Satisfaction With Physical Therapy Care: A Systematic Review

Physical Therapy ◽

10.1093/ptj/pzaa111 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 100 (9) ◽

pp. 1690-1700

Author(s):

Daniel Gutiérrez-Sánchez ◽

David Pérez-Cruzado ◽

Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Patient Satisfaction ◽

Physical Therapy ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Methodological Quality ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Selection Of

Abstract Objective Several instruments to measure patient satisfaction have been developed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The selection of the most appropriate instrument is very important. The purpose of this study was to identify instruments for assessing satisfaction with physical therapy care and their psychometric properties and to evaluate the methodological quality of studies on psychometric properties. Methods A systematic search was conducted in ProQuest Medline, SciELO, ProQuest PsycINFO, Theseus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. Articles published from 1990 to 2019, in English and Spanish, were used as limits. This systematic review followed the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. The articles were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments 4-point checklist. Eighteen studies were included. Results Nine instruments were found to be specifically designed to assess satisfaction with physical therapy care. The methodological quality of the studies was “fair” for most of the psychometric characteristics analyzed (43 items), with 24 properties scored as “poor,” 5 as “good,” and 3 as “excellent.” Conclusions Different instrument characteristics—such as the scope and population with which the instrument will be used, its dimensions, the number of items, and the evidence shown in the evaluation of each psychometric property—should be considered by clinicians and researchers to decide which instrument is the best to measure the construct of patient satisfaction with physical therapy. Impact Evaluating patient satisfaction is very useful in clinical practice at the hospital, community, and primary care levels. Physical therapist clinicians and researchers can use this systematic review to select instruments whose characteristics will best measure their patients’ satisfaction with physical therapy care.

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

Measuring perceived adequacy of staffing to incorporate nurses’ judgement into hospital capacity management: a scoping review

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045245 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e045245

Author(s):

Carmen J E M van der Mark ◽

Hester Vermeulen ◽

Paul H J Hendriks ◽

Catharina J van Oostveen

Keyword(s):

Psychometric Properties ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Care Delivery ◽

Hospital Setting ◽

Workforce Planning ◽

Nurse Staffing ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Factors Influencing

BackgroundMatching demand and supply in nursing work continues to generate debate. Current approaches focus on objective measures, such as nurses per occupied bed or patient classification. However, staff numbers do not tell the whole staffing story. The subjective measure of nurses’ perceived adequacy of staffing (PAS) has the potential to enhance nurse staffing methods in a way that goes beyond traditional workload measurement or workforce planning methods.ObjectivesTo detect outcomes associated with nurses’ PAS and the factors that influence PAS and to review the psychometric properties of instruments used to measure PAS in a hospital setting.Design and methodsA scoping review was performed to identify outcomes associated with PAS, factors influencing PAS and instruments measuring PAS. A search of PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Business Source Complete and Embase databases identified 2609 potentially relevant articles. Data were independently extracted, analysed and synthesised. The quality of studies describing influencing factors or outcomes of PAS and psychometric properties of instruments measuring PAS were assessed following the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence quality appraisal checklist and the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments guidelines.ResultsSixty-three studies were included, describing 60 outcomes of PAS, 79 factors influencing PAS and 21 instruments measuring PAS. In general, positive PAS was related to positive outcomes for the patient, nurse and organisation, supporting the relevance of PAS as a staffing measure. We identified a variety of factors that influence PAS, including demand for care, nurse supply and organisation of care delivery. Associations between these factors and PAS were inconsistent. The quality of studies investigating the development and evaluation of instruments measuring PAS was moderate.ConclusionsMeasuring the PAS may enhance nurse staffing methods in a hospital setting. Further work is needed to refine and psychometrically evaluate instruments for measuring PAS.

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

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

A systematic review of the application and psychometric properties of the graded Wolf Motor Function Test

British Journal of Occupational Therapy ◽

10.1177/0308022619879074 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 83 (5) ◽

pp. 285-296

Author(s):

Beverley Turtle ◽

Alison Porter-Armstrong ◽

May Stinson

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Motor Function ◽

Keyword Search ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Clinical Measurement ◽

Function Test ◽

Wolf Motor Function Test

Introduction Adapted from the Wolf Motor Function Test, the graded Wolf Motor Function Test is an upper limb activity assessment for use following stroke and brain injury. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and appraise evidence where the test has been used or has undergone psychometric evaluation. Method A systematic review of five databases was conducted to identify studies reporting the graded Wolf Motor Function Test using a keyword search. Intervention and clinical measurement studies were eligible for inclusion. Data quality was assessed using the adapted Critical Appraisal Skills Programme questions and the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments Risk of Bias checklist. Results Twelve studies, of mostly low quality, were included. Studies included one randomised controlled trial, 10 pre- and post-studies and one clinical measurement study. All studies involved participants following stroke. Reliability was the only measurement property assessed in two studies, which were of a ‘doubtful’ and ‘poor’ quality. Conclusion Low quality studies impede the ability of clinicians and researchers to best determine the applicability of the graded Wolf Motor Function Test to patient groups and research contexts. Further exploration of the psychometric properties of the graded Wolf Motor Function Test is recommended across stroke populations using rigorous design methods.

Download Full-text

Psychometric properties of quantitative sensory testing focusing on healthy and patients with shoulder pain: a systematic review protocol

International Journal of Clinical Trials ◽

10.18203/2349-3259.ijct20212848 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 253

Author(s):

Paraskevi Bilika ◽

Konstantina Savvoulidou ◽

Achilleas Paliouras ◽

Zacharias Dimitriadis ◽

Evdokia Billis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Shoulder Pain ◽

Quantitative Sensory Testing ◽

Somatosensory System ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Sensory Testing ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Level Of Evidence

Background: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a battery of non-invasive psychophysical methods to assess the function of somatosensory system. Although the use of QST is widespread and several studies in patients with chronic shoulder pain have used it, the level of evidence for the psychometric properties has not been established. The aim of this protocol is to investigate, through a systematic review, the level of evidence for the psychometric properties of QST in the shoulder.Methods: For conducting and reporting this review the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) guidelines will be used. Nine databases including PubMed, Medline, AMED (via EBSCO), PEDRO, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, SportDiscus, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library will be searched for the period from their inception until September 2021. Two reviewers (BP and SK) will independently evaluate the retrieved articles (titles and abstracts) and the psychometric characteristics checklist based on the standards from the COSMIN. The modified grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the overall quality of the evidence.Conclusions: Evaluation of the level of evidence for the psychometric properties of QST in the shoulder is an essential step for evidence-based assessment in clinical practice.Trial registration: PROSPERO registration number is CRD42021232778.

Download Full-text

Perceived Parental Monitoring: A Systematic Review of Monitoring Instruments

Journal of Nursing Measurement ◽

10.1891/jnm-d-19-00045 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. JNM-D-19-00045

Author(s):

Caroline Handschuh ◽

Lidwine B. Mokkink ◽

Arlene Smaldone

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Psychometric Properties ◽

Parental Monitoring ◽

Future Research ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Parent Child Relationship ◽

Quality Of Reporting ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Psychometric Quality

Background and purposeThe purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate parental monitoring instruments and the theoretical perspectives informing their development.MethodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, seven databases were searched for original studies using a monitoring instrument. The psychometric properties of each identified instrument were assessed using the “COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments” (COSMIN) methodology.ResultsOf 2,245 articles identified, 72 studies representing six parental monitoring instruments met inclusion criteria. Quality of reporting on psychometric properties varied widely across instruments with only three including content validation studies.ConclusionsFindings of this review reveal inattention to the psychometric quality of child self-reported monitoring instruments. Future research must focus on the psychometric quality of instruments used to measure the parent–child relationship.

Download Full-text

Should We Be Concerned about How Information Privacy Concerns Are Measured in Online Contexts? A Systematic Review of Survey Scale Development Studies

Informatics ◽

10.3390/informatics8020031 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 31

Author(s):

Jošt Bartol ◽

Vasja Vehovar ◽

Andraž Petrovčič

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Scale Development ◽

Information Privacy ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Privacy Concerns ◽

Information Privacy Concerns ◽

Methodological Procedures ◽

New Research

This systematic review addresses problems identified in existing research on survey measurements of individuals’ information privacy concerns in online contexts. The search in this study focused on articles published between 1996 and 2019 and yielded 970 articles. After excluding duplicates and screening for eligibility, we were left with 13 articles in which the investigators developed a total of 16 survey scales. In addition to reviewing the conceptualizations, contexts, and dimensionalities of the scales, we evaluated the quality of methodological procedures used in the scale development process, drawing upon the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. The results confirmed that the breadth of conceptualizations and dimensions of information privacy concerns are constructed with a low emphasis on contextuality. Assessment of the quality of methodological procedures suggested a need for a more thorough evaluation of content validity. We provide several recommendations for tackling these issues and propose new research directions.

Download Full-text