scholarly journals The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lidwine B. Mokkink ◽  
Cecilia A. C. Prinsen ◽  
Lex M. Bouter ◽  
Henrica C. W. de Vet ◽  
Caroline B. Terwee
Keyword(s):  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Measurement Instrument ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Selection Of

scholarly journals International development and implementation of a core measurement set for research and audit studies in implant-based breast reconstruction: a study protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e035505
Author(s):  
Shelley Potter ◽  
Charlotte Davies ◽  
Christopher Holcombe ◽  
Eva Weiler-Mithoff ◽  
Joanna Skillman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
International Development ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Core Outcome ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Clinical Patient ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Selection Of

IntroductionOutcome reporting in research studies of breast reconstruction is inconsistent and lacks standardisation. The results of individual studies therefore cannot be meaningfully compared or combined limiting their value. A core outcome set (COS) has been developed to address these issues and identified 11 key outcomes to be measured and reported in all future research and audit studies in reconstructive breast surgery (RBS). A COS represents what key outcomes should be measured. The next step is to determine how and when this should be done. The aim of this study is to develop a core measurement set (CMS) for use in research and audit studies in implant-based breast reconstruction.Methods and analysisThe CMS will be developed in accordance with the guidance developed by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative (COMET) and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group for the selection of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) for relevant outcome domains included in the RBS COS. This will involve three phases with strategies to promote implementation as a final additional phase. The phases are (1) conceptual considerations in which the target population, procedures and settings are defined; (2) systematic reviews to identify existing clinical, patient-reported and cosmetic OMIs and, if appropriate, assess their quality using COSMIN methodology; (3) a modified Delphi process including sequential Delphi surveys involving approximately 100 healthcare professionals and a face to face consensus meeting to agree and ratify which outcome definitions and OMIs should be used and standardised time points for assessment; (4) strategies to promote dissemination and adoption of the CMS.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by University of Bristol Faculty Research Ethics Committee FREC ID 60221. Dissemination strategies will include scientific meeting presentations and peer-reviewed journal publications. Implementation activities will include engagement with journal editors and funders to promote uptake and use of the CMS.

scholarly journals Report of the GRAPPA-OMERACT Psoriatic Arthritis Working Group from the GRAPPA 2015 Annual Meeting

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 965-969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana-Maria Orbai ◽  
Philip J. Mease ◽  
Maarten de Wit ◽  
Umut Kalyoncu ◽  
Willemina Campbell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Measurement Instrument ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Core Domain ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
Core Domain Set ◽  
Selection Of

The GRAPPA-OMERACT psoriatic arthritis (PsA) working group is in the process of updating the PsA core domain set to improve and standardize the measurement of PsA outcomes. Work streams comprise literature reviews of domains and outcome measurement instruments, an international qualitative research project with PsA patients to generate domains important to patients, outcome measurement instrument assessment, conduct of domain consensus panels with patients and physicians, and evidence-based selection of instruments. Patient research partners are involved in each of the projects. The working group will present findings and seek endorsement for the new PsA core domain set, outcome measurement set, and research agenda at the OMERACT meeting in May 2016.

scholarly journals PROPRIEDADES PSICOMÉTRICAS DE INSTRUMENTOS DE MEDIDAS: BASES CONCEITUAIS E MÉTODOS DE AVALIAÇÃO - PARTE I

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Elena Echevarría-Guanilo ◽  
Natália Gonçalves ◽  
Priscila Juceli Romanoski
Keyword(s):  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Selection Of

RESUMO Objetivo: apresentar e discutir bases conceituais e métodos de avaliações que fundamentam importantes propriedades de instrumentos de medidas. Método: estudo teórico embasado na literatura internacional e nacional e nos instrumentos Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments e Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes que contemplam conceitos de avaliação de instrumentos para apreciação de resultados relatados pelo paciente. Inicialmente são apresentados e discutidos os conceitos de confiabilidade, responsividade e interpretabilidade, citados exemplos das principais formas de avaliação dessas propriedades. Resultados: pode-se perceber que ainda há divergências em algumas descrições conceituais. Entretanto, os autores ressaltam a importância da confiabilidade para avaliar o instrumento de medida. Destaca-se a importância do conhecimento do Modelo Conceitual, das propriedades de medidas e dos diferentes métodos de avaliação para garantir, principalmente em estudo de validação de instrumentos, resultados confiáveis e válidos. Conclusões: a discussão apresentada sobre a confiabilidade, responsividade e interpretabilidade contribui para os profissionais de saúde no conhecimento teórico e senso crítico na escolha de instrumentos e na condução de análises sobre essas propriedades de medida.

scholarly journals COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L. B. Mokkink ◽  
M. Boers ◽  
C. P. M. van der Vleuten ◽  
L. M. Bouter ◽  
J. Alonso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Measurement Error ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Outcome Measurement ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Measurement Instrument ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Sources Of Variation ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Scores on an outcome measurement instrument depend on the type and settings of the instrument used, how instructions are given to patients, how professionals administer and score the instrument, etc. The impact of all these sources of variation on scores can be assessed in studies on reliability and measurement error, if properly designed and analyzed. The aim of this study was to develop standards to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error of clinician-reported outcome measurement instruments, performance-based outcome measurement instrument, and laboratory values. Methods We conducted a 3-round Delphi study involving 52 panelists. Results Consensus was reached on how a comprehensive research question can be deduced from the design of a reliability study to determine how the results of a study inform us about the quality of the outcome measurement instrument at issue. Consensus was reached on components of outcome measurement instruments, i.e. the potential sources of variation. Next, we reached consensus on standards on design requirements (n = 5), standards on preferred statistical methods for reliability (n = 3) and measurement error (n = 2), and their ratings on a four-point scale. There was one term for a component and one rating of one standard on which no consensus was reached, and therefore required a decision by the steering committee. Conclusion We developed a tool that enables researchers with and without thorough knowledge on measurement properties to assess the quality of a study on reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments.

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

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.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Measurement of Practices-Knowledge-Attitudes of the Nursing Process: Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Alberto Camargo-Figuera ◽  
María Alejandra Ortega-Barco ◽  
María Camila Rojas-Plata ◽  
Daniela Marín-Rodríguez ◽  
Lizeth Johana Alarcón-Meléndez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nursing Care ◽  
Care Process ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Full Text Review ◽  
Two Stages ◽  
Knowledge Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Selection Of

Objective. To analyze the literature available on the psychometric properties of the instruments to measure knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the nursing care process. Methods. This was a narrative-type review conducted by following the recommendations of the PRISMA declaration. The search strategy was executed in two stages; through the search in databases by two reviewers and – thereafter – three reviewers identified independently the studies and evaluated the methodological quality of the measurement instruments by using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) property checklist boxes. Results. Of 71 studies identified for the full-text review, only seven complied with the inclusion criteria that represent four instruments (Q-DIO, D-CATCH, NP-CDSS, PNP). It was found that the instruments continue in their validation and appropriation processes to reality in health services. Conclusion. In spite of the evident evolution of the instruments to evaluate the implementation of the nursing care process, the need is still valid for an instrument that measures aspects of knowledge, attitudes, and practices in every stage of the process.

scholarly journals Is IDDSI an Evidence-Based Framework? A Relevant Question for the Frail Older Population

Geriatrics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 82
Author(s):  
Claudia Côté ◽  
Amélie Giroux ◽  
Annie Villeneuve-Rhéaume ◽  
Cynthia Gagnon ◽  
Isabelle Germain
Keyword(s):  
Reduce Food Intake ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Testing Methods ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Physical Decline ◽  
Care Plans ◽  
Swallowing Difficulties ◽  
Older Populations ◽  
Selection Of

To delay impacts of aging, optimal nutritional status is essential. Several factors can reduce food intake, such as isolation, income, and cognitive/physical decline. Additionally, chewing and swallowing difficulties, or dysphagia, often disrupt the ability to consume life-long favorite dishes. Food and liquids could require modification of texture or consistency to ensure a comfortable or safe swallow. The food industry, foodservices facilities, and caregivers need quality control benchmarks to provide adequate nourishment and meet these new feeding challenges. The International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative (IDDSI) is proposing the IDDSI framework and testing methods to describe food used in nutritional care plans to circumvent dysphagia and improve communication among caregivers. This systematic review assesses the validity and reliability of the IDDSI testing methods using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). Two publications presented content validity whereas 19 publications looked at construct validity or reliability for the IDDSI testing methods. One study was conducted in older adults presenting dysphagia. This review concludes that there is insufficient evidence to recommend the IDDSI testing methods. Further research, conducted with robust methodological design and reporting, is needed to develop and assess nutritious adapted food for frail older populations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document