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

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.

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

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.

scholarly journals 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

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. e044888
Author(s):  
Rita McMorrow ◽  
Barbara Hunter ◽  
Christel Hendrieckx ◽  
Dominika Kwasnicka ◽  
Leanne Cussen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Type 2 Diabetes ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Diabetes Distress ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Patient Reported

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.

scholarly journals A systematic review of the measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures used for adults with an ankle fracture

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca McKeown ◽  
David R. Ellard ◽  
Abdul-Rasheed Rabiu ◽  
Eleni Karasouli ◽  
Rebecca S. Kearney
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Ankle Fracture ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported

Abstract Background Ankle fractures are painful and debilitating injuries that pose a significant burden to society and healthcare systems. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used outcome measures in clinical trials of interventions for ankle fracture but there is little evidence on their validity and reliability. This systematic review aims to identify and appraise evidence for the measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs used in adults with an ankle fracture using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instrument (COSMIN) methodology. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL online databases for evidence of measurement properties of ankle specific PROMs. Articles were included if they assessed or described the development of the PROM in adults with ankle fracture. Articles were ineligible if they used the PROM to assess the measurement properties of another instrument. Abstracts without full articles and conference proceedings were ineligible, as were articles that adapted the PROM under evaluation without any formal justification of the changes as part of a cross-cultural validation or translation process. Two reviewers completed the screening. To assess methodological quality we used COSMIN risk of bias checklist and summarised evidence using COSMIN quality criteria and a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Two reviewers assessed the methodological quality and extracted the data for a sample of articles. Results The searches returned a total of 377 articles. From these, six articles were included after application of eligibility criteria. These articles evaluated three PROMs: A-FORM, OMAS and AAOS. The A-FORM had evidence of a robust development process within the patient population, however lacks post-formulation testing. The OMAS showed sufficient levels of reliability, internal consistency and construct validity. The AAOS showed low quality evidence of sufficient construct validity. Conclusions There is insufficient evidence to support the recommendation of a particular PROM for use in adult ankle fracture research based on COSMIN methodology. Further validation of these outcome measures is required in order to ensure PROMs used in this area are sufficiently valid and reliable to assess treatment effects. This would enable high quality, evidenced-based management of adults with ankle fracture.

scholarly journals A systematic review of measurement properties of patient reported outcome measures in psoriatic arthritis: A GRAPPA-OMERACT initiative

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 654-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pil Højgaard ◽  
Louise Klokker ◽  
Ana-Maria Orbai ◽  
Kim Holmsted ◽  
Else M. Bartels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psoriatic Arthritis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Pruritus: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties

2017 ◽  
Vol 137 (10) ◽  
pp. 2069-2077 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic Schoch ◽  
Rachel Sommer ◽  
Matthias Augustin ◽  
Sonja Ständer ◽  
Christine Blome
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Measurement Properties of Existing Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Medication Adherence: Systematic Review (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Heng Kwan ◽  
Si Dun Weng ◽  
Dionne Hui Fang Loh ◽  
Jie Kie Phang ◽  
Livia Jia Yi Oo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Medication Adherence ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Adherence Scale

BACKGROUND Medication adherence is essential for improving the health outcomes of patients. Various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed to measure medication adherence in patients. However, no study has summarized the psychometric properties of these PROMs to guide selection for use in clinical practice or research. OBJECTIVE This study aims to evaluate the quality of the PROMs used to measure medication adherence. 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, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases. The PROMs were then evaluated based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines. RESULTS A total of 121 unique medication adherence PROMs from 214 studies were identified. <i>Hypotheses testing for construct validity</i> and <i>internal consistency</i> were the most frequently assessed measurement properties. PROMs with at least a <i>moderate</i> level of evidence for ≥5 measurement properties include the Adherence Starts with Knowledge 20, Compliance Questionnaire-Rheumatology, General Medication Adherence Scale, Hill-Bone Scale, Immunosuppressant Therapy Barrier Scale, Medication Adherence Reasons Scale (MAR-Scale) revised, 5-item Medication Adherence Rating Scale (MARS-5), 9-item MARS (MARS-9), 4-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-4), 8-item MMAS (MMAS-8), Self-efficacy for Appropriate Medication Adherence Scale, Satisfaction with Iron Chelation Therapy, Test of Adherence to Inhalers, and questionnaire by Voils. The MAR-Scale revised, MMAS-4, and MMAS-8 have been administered electronically. CONCLUSIONS This study identified 121 PROMs for medication adherence and provided synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of these PROMs. The findings from this study may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting suitable PROMs to assess medication adherence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document