scholarly journals Nutritional Status Measurement Instruments for Diabetes: A Systematic Psychometric Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (16) ◽  
pp. 5719
Author(s):  
Pedro Montagut-Martínez ◽  
David Pérez-Cruzado ◽  
José Joaquín García-Arenas
Keyword(s):  
Nutritional Status ◽  
Dietary Intake ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Premature Death ◽  
Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Increased Risk

Background: Diabetes is a serious chronic disease associated with a large number of complications and an increased risk of premature death. A dietary evaluation is of utmost importance for health promotion, disease prevention and individual treatment plans in patients with diabetes. Methods: An exhaustive search was carried out in various databases—Medline, Web of Science, Open Gray Cochrane Library and Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN)—for systematic review of the measurement properties of instruments that evaluate the dietary intake of people with diabetes mellitus type 1 and/or 2 according to COSMIN standards. Results: Seven instruments were identified. There was no instrument measuring nutritional status for which all the psychometric properties were evaluated. The methodological quality for each of the psychometric properties evaluated was ‘inadequate’ or ‘doubtful’ for all instruments. The Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) evaluated the most psychometric characteristics and with a better score in terms of quality of the evidence. Conclusions: Several instruments have been developed for the evaluation of dietary intake in people with diabetes. Evaluation of this construct is very useful, both in clinical practice and in research, requiring new knowledge in this area. The FFQ is the best instrument available to assess dietary intake in people with diabetes.

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

BMJ Open ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Suffering measurement instruments in palliative care: protocol for a systematic psychometric review

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. e027524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Gutiérrez Sánchez ◽  
Rafael Gómez García ◽  
Isabel María López-Medina ◽  
Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Advanced Disease ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Cosmin Checklist ◽  
Selection Of

IntroductionThe prevention and relief of suffering are regarded as a goal at the end of life; therefore, suffering assessment at the end of life is essential. In this regard, we need instruments that allow us to evaluate this construct for gathering more evidence, as the assessment of suffering is increasingly used in research and the clinical setting. Many measures have been designed to assess this construct, and the selection of the most appropriate instrument is crucial. The aims of this systematic review are to (1) identify the measures assessing suffering in patients with advanced disease and their psychometric properties and (2) evaluate the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties.Methods and analysisThe protocol of this systematic review was developed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols Guidelines. A systematic psychometric review of measures assessing suffering in patients with advanced disease and their psychometric properties will be carried out according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). The search strategy will be performed following the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies. Searches will be conducted in Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medline, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, SciELO, Open Grey, Scopus, Web of Science and COSMIN database of systematic reviews, and it will be limited by time (1980–2018) and language (only literature in English and Spanish). Literature will be evaluated by two independent reviewers according to the COSMIN checklist, and measurement properties data of each study that meet the inclusion criteria will be scored independently by two researchers according to COSMIN quality ratings.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not necessary for systematic review protocols. The results will be disseminated by publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant conference.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018106488.

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.

Review of the importance of nutrition during the first 1000 days: maternal nutritional status and its associations with fetal growth and birth, neonatal and infant outcomes among African women

2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 144-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. V. Wrottesley ◽  
C. Lamper ◽  
P. T. Pisa
Keyword(s):  
Birth Weight ◽  
Nutritional Status ◽  
Fetal Growth ◽  
Overweight And Obesity ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Maternal Body Mass Index ◽  
Infant Outcomes ◽  
Maternal Nutritional Status ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Maternal Overweight

Maternal nutritional status (MNS) is a strong predictor of growth and development in the first 1000 days of life and may influence susceptibility to non-communicable diseases in adulthood. However, the role of nutrition during this window of developmental plasticity in Africa is unclear. This paper reviews published data to address whether maternal nutrition during the first 1000 days is important for Africa, with a focus on MNS and its associations with fetal growth and birth, neonatal and infant outcomes. A systematic approach was used to search the following databases: Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, SciSearch and Cochrane Library. In all, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria for the specific objectives. MNS in Africa showed features typical of the epidemiological transition: higher prevalences of maternal overweight and obesity and lower underweight, poor diet quality 1 and high anaemia prevalence. Maternal body mass index and greater gestational weight gain (GWG) were positively associated with birth weight; however, maternal overweight and obesity were associated with increased risk of macrosomia and intrauterine growth restriction. Maternal anaemia was associated with lower birth weight. Macro- and micronutrient supplementation during pregnancy were associated with improvements in GWG, birth weight and mortality risk. Data suggest poor MNS in Africa and confirms the importance of the first 1000 days as a critical period for nutritional intervention to improve growth, birth outcomes and potential future health risk. However, there is a lack of data beyond birth and a need for longitudinal data through infancy to 2 years of age.

scholarly journals Informant-based assessment instruments for dementia and their measurement properties in persons with intellectual disability: systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e040920
Author(s):  
Elisabeth L Zeilinger ◽  
Sophie Komenda ◽  
Irina Zrnic ◽  
Fabian Franken ◽  
Katharina Woditschka
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Functional Impairments ◽  
Global Risk ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Health Measurement

IntroductionPersons with intellectual disability (ID) are at a higher risk of developing dementia than persons without ID, with an expected earlier onset. Assessment methods for the general population cannot be applied for persons with ID due to their pre-existing intellectual and functional impairments. As there is no agreed-upon measure to assess dementia in persons with ID, multiple instruments for this purpose have been developed and adapted in the past decades. This review aimed to identify all available informant-based instruments for the assessment of dementia in persons with ID, to evaluate and compare them according to their measurement properties, and to provide a recommendation for the most suitable instruments. Additionally, an overview of the amount and quality of research on these instruments will be provided.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We will adhere to the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines and use a set of characteristics developed for assessment instruments for persons with ID, the Characteristics of Assessment Instruments for Psychiatric Disorders in Persons with Intellectual Developmental Disorders. Two comprehensive, systematic literature searches will be applied in 10 international databases, including ASSIA, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, OpenGrey and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. Risk of bias and quality assessment will be done according to COSMIN guidelines. We will apply the modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to rate the overall quality of the available evidence.Ethics and disseminationNo ethics statement is needed for this study. The results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at international conferences.

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

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

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> 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.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> 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.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Trial registration:</strong> PROSPERO registration number is CRD42021232778.</p>

Perioperative Management of Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 and 2

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vidya T. Raman
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Dietary Intake ◽  
Diabetic Ketoacidosis ◽  
Perioperative Management ◽  
Diabetes Management ◽  
Diabetes Mellitus Type 1 ◽  
Close Monitoring ◽  
Increased Risk

Diabetes management offers unique challenges in children and adolescents versus adults especially in the perioperative environment. The obvious challenges of monitoring dietary intake plus possible communication barriers with increased risk of diabetic ketoacidosis and hypoglycemia. Adding the catabolic stressors from surgery also add challenges to the perioperative physician managing the patient’s glycemic control. It is important to work with endocrinology in order to manage their diabetes. Lengthier procedures also complicate glycemic control. It involves sometimes close monitoring of not only glucose but electrolytes and blood and urine ketones.

scholarly journals A protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify measures of breakthrough pain and evaluate their psychometric properties

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e035541
Author(s):  
Katie Greenfield ◽  
Simone Holley ◽  
Daniel Eric Schoth ◽  
Julie Bayliss ◽  
Anna-Karenia Anderson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Breakthrough Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Health Measurement

IntroductionBreakthrough pain is common in children and adults with cancer and other conditions, including those approaching end-of-life, although it is often poorly managed, possibly partly due to a lack of validated assessment tools. This review aims to (1) identify all available instruments measuring breakthrough pain in infants, children, adolescents or adults and (2) critically appraise, compare and summarise the quality of the psychometric properties of the identified instruments using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria.Methods and analysisTwo searches will be carried out between October 2019 and January 2020, one for each aim of the review. The Cochrane Library, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Google Scholar, the ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Database, Evidence Search and OpenGrey databases will be searched from database inception until the date the search is conducted. Reference lists of eligible articles will be screened and authors in the field contacted. For search 1, articles will be screened by two reviewers by abstract, and full-text where necessary, to identify if a breakthrough pain assessment was used. Search 2 will then be conducted to identify studies evaluating measurement properties of these assessments. Two reviewers will screen articles from search 2 by title and abstract. All potentially relevant studies will be screened by full text by both reviewers. For search 2, data will be extracted in parallel with the quality assessment process, as recommended by COSMIN. Two reviewers will assess methodological quality using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist and the COSMIN updated criteria for good measurement properties. Findings will be summarised and, if possible, data will be pooled using meta-analysis. The quality of the evidence will be graded and summarised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines.Ethics and disseminationResults of this review will be submitted for publication in a peer review journal and presented at conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019155583.

scholarly journals Motor imagery ability assessments in four disciplines: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (12) ◽  
pp. e023439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zorica Suica ◽  
Petra Platteau-Waldmeier ◽  
Szabina Koppel ◽  
Arno Schmidt-Trucksaess ◽  
Thierry Ettlin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Motor Imagery ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis

IntroductionMotor imagery (MI) is a very popular and well-accepted technique in different disciplines. Originating from sport and psychology, MI is now also used in the field of medicine and education. Several studies confirmed the benefits of MI to facilitate motor learning and skill acquisition. The findings indicated that individual’s MI ability might influence the effectiveness of MI interventions. Over the last two centuries, researchers have developed several assessments to evaluate MI’s abstract construct. However, no systematic reviews (SR) exist for MI ability evaluation methods and their measurement properties.Methods and analysisThe SR will evaluate available MI ability assessments and their psychometric properties in four relevant disciplines: sports, psychology, medicine and education. This involves performing searches in SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and ERIC. Working independently, two reviewers will screen articles for selection. Then all raw information will be compiled in an overview table—including the articles’ characteristics (eg, a study’s setting or the population demographics) and the MI ability assessment (psychometric properties). To evaluate the articles’ methodological quality, we will use the COSMIN checklist. Then we will evaluate all the included assessments’ quality and perform a best-evidence synthesis. Results of this review will be reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThe SR is based on published data, and ethical approval is not required. This review will provide information on assessment performance and equipment, as well as its main focus and usefulness. Furthermore, we will present the methodological quality of all the included articles and assess the included instruments’ quality. Ultimately, this will act as a valuable resource, providing an overview of MI ability assessments for individual clinical settings, treatment aims, and various populations. The SR’s final report will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42017077004

Assessing recovery from schizophrenia as an individual process. A review of self-report instruments

2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Cavelti ◽  
S. Kvrgic ◽  
E.-M. Beck ◽  
J. Kossowsky ◽  
R. Vauth
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Psychiatric Symptoms ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Personal Recovery ◽  
Clinical Recovery ◽  
The Individual

AbstractObjectiveStudies investigating indicators of recovery from schizophrenia yielded two concepts of recovery. The first is the reduction of psychiatric symptoms and functional disabilities (‘clinical recovery’), while the second describes the individual adaptation process to the threat posed to the individual sense of self by the disorder and its negative consequences (‘personal recovery’). Evidence suggests that both perceptions contribute substantially to the understanding of recovery and require specific assessment and therapy. While current reviews of measures of clinical recovery exist, measures of personal recovery have yet to be investigated. Considering the steadily growing literature on recovery, this article gives an update about existing measures assessing personal recovery.MethodA literature search for instruments was performed using Medline, Embase, PsycINFO&PSYNDEXPlus, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were: (1) quantitative self-report measures; (2) specifically developed for adults with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder or at least applied to individuals suffering from severe mental illness; (3) empirically tested psychometric properties and/or published in a peer-reviewed, English-language journal. Instruments were evaluated with regard to psychometric properties (validity and reliability) and issues of application (user and administrator friendliness, translations).ResultsThirteen instruments met the inclusion criteria. They were individually described and finally summarized in a table reflecting the pros and cons of each instrument. This may enable the reader to make an evidence-based choice for a questionnaire for a specific application.ConclusionThe Recovery Assessment Scale is possibly the best currently available measure of personal recovery when all evaluation criteria are included. However, the ratings listed in the current paper depended on the availability of information and the quality of available reports of previous assessment of the measurement properties. Considering the significant amount of information lacking and inconsistent findings, further research on the reviewed measures is perhaps more important than the development of new measures of personal recovery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document