The Reliability of the Microsoft Kinect and Ambulatory Sensor-Based Motion Tracking Devices to Measure Shoulder Range-of-Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Advancements in motion sensing technology can potentially allow clinicians to make more accurate range-of-motion (ROM) measurements and informed decisions regarding patient management. The aim of this study was to systematically review and appraise the literature on the reliability of the Kinect, inertial sensors, smartphone applications and digital inclinometers/goniometers to measure shoulder ROM. Eleven databases were screened (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, SPORTSDiscus, Compendex, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, Proquest Science and Technology, Scopus, and PubMed). The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Reliability assessment used intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the criteria from Swinkels et al. (2005). Thirty-two studies were included. A total of 24 studies scored “adequate” and 2 scored “very good” for the reliability standards. Only one study scored “very good” and just over half of the studies (18/32) scored “adequate” for the measurement error standards. Good intra-rater reliability (ICC > 0.85) and inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.80) was demonstrated with the Kinect, smartphone applications and digital inclinometers. Overall, the Kinect and ambulatory sensor-based human motion tracking devices demonstrate moderate–good levels of intra- and inter-rater reliability to measure shoulder ROM. Future reliability studies should focus on improving study design with larger sample sizes and recommended time intervals between repeated measurements.

A Novel Biosensor and Algorithm to Predict Vitamin D Status by Measuring Skin Impedance

The deficiency and excess of vitamin D cause various diseases, necessitating continuous management; but it is not easy to accurately measure the serum vitamin D level in the body using a non-invasive method. The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between vitamin D levels, body information obtained by an InBody scan, and blood parameters obtained during health checkups, to determine the optimum frequency of vitamin D quantification in the skin and to propose a vitamin D measurement method based on impedance. We assessed body composition, arm impedance, and blood vitamin D concentrations to determine the correlation between each element using multiple machine learning analyses and an algorithm which predicted the concentration of vitamin D in the body using the impedance value developed. Body fat percentage obtained from the InBody device and blood parameters albumin and lactate dehydrogenase correlated with vitamin D level. An impedance measurement frequency of 21.1 Hz was reflected in the blood vitamin D concentration at optimum levels, and a confidence level of about 75% for vitamin D in the body was confirmed. These data demonstrate that the concentration of vitamin D in the body can be predicted using impedance measurement values. This method can be used for predicting and monitoring vitamin D-related diseases and may be incorporated in wearable health measurement devices.

Systematic review of validated parent-reported questionnaires assessing swallowing dysfunction in otherwise healthy infants and toddlers

Objectives There has been increasing interest in the management of oropharyngeal swallowing dysfunction (SwD). Its prevalence, particularly in otherwise healthy infants and toddlers (OHITs), is underappreciated. As the standard diagnostic tests are either invasive or scarce, valid parent-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires could play a pivotal role in the understanding and managing SwD in this group. This article reviewed the literature on PRO questionnaires pertaining to SwD in OHITs. Data source A librarian searched Prospero, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, HaPI, CINAHL, and SCOPUS until February 2021 using the MeSH terms for deglutition and screening methods. Review method Questionnaires that examined disease-specific or eating and feeding concerns or difficulties were excluded. Two reviewers independently identified PRO questionnaires for SwD that were used in OHITs and extracted the author names, publication year, questionnaire name, the studied population, and the reported psychometric assessments. A quality assessment was performed based on consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments (COSMIN) and updated criteria for good measurement properties. Results Of the 3488 screened articles, we identified only two questionnaires, the pediatric version of the Eating Assessment Tool (PEDI-EAT-10) and the PRO questionnaire for Swallowing Dysfunction in OHITs. The PEDI-EAT-10 authors assessed the validity and reliability on children with cerebral palsy. However, concerns were identified regarding the developmental process and the internal structure validity. The PRO questionnaire for SwD in OHITs meets criteria but has not yet been validated in the population of interest nor its psychometric properties assessed. Conclusion Two instruments were identified. The PED-EAT-10 exhibits methodological flaws, while Edmonton PRO questionnaire for SwD in OHITs awaits construct validation and could fill the current knowledge gap.

Frameworks, measures, and interventions for HIV-related internalised stigma and stigma in healthcare and laws and policies: systematic review protocol

IntroductionThere is strong global commitment to eliminate HIV-related stigma. Wide variation exists in frameworks and measures, and many strategies to prevent, reduce or mitigate stigma have been proposed but critical factors determining success or failure remain elusive.Methods and analysisBuilding on existing knowledge syntheses, we designed a systematic review to identify frameworks, measures and intervention evaluations aiming to address internalised stigma, stigma and discrimination in healthcare, and stigma and discrimination at the legal or policy level. The review addresses four key questions (KQ): KQ1: Which conceptual frameworks have been proposed to assess internal stigma, stigma and discrimination experienced in healthcare settings, and stigma and discrimination entrenched in national laws and policies? KQ2: Which measures of stigma have been proposed and what are their descriptive properties? KQ3: Which interventions have been evaluated that aimed to reduce these types of stigma and discrimination or mitigate their adverse effects and what are the effectiveness and unintended consequences? KQ4: What common ‘critical factors for success or failure’ can be identified across interventions that have been evaluated? We will search PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Universal Human Rights Index, HeinOnline, PAIS, HIV Legal Network, CDSR, Campbell Collaboration, PROSPERO and Open Science Framework. Critical appraisal will assess the source, processes and consensus finding for frameworks; COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments criteria for measures; and risk of bias for interventions. Quality of evidence grading will apply . A gap analysis will provide targeted recommendations for future research. We will establish a compendium of frameworks, a comprehensive catalogue of available measures, and a synthesis of intervention characteristics to advance the science of HIV-related stigma.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021249348.

A Critical Review of Adversity Quotient Instruments: Using the Cosmin Checklist

Adversity intelligence and adversity quotient is the critical ability and robust predictor of a person’s success. However, no consensus and generalized instrument have been established. Hence, the study aims to assess the methodological quality and measurement features of the existing tools for adversity intelligence by identifying and evaluating the instruments following the consensus-based standards for selecting health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist. From 255 research studies, six tools were eligible by a systematic review of online databases and books. For three or more of the nine COSMIN criteria, only two of the instruments had strong to moderate levels of evidence. Meanwhile, none of the instruments met any of the criteria. These results demonstrate that no single instrument outperforms all others in all circumstances. Tools that will be refined in the future should capture the development, methodology, and quality during the development of the instrument and achieve a high measurement quality and a generalized tool of measuring adversity intelligence.

Development and Validation of Self-screening Tool for Nutrition Risk in Patients With Gastric Cancer After Gastrectomy: A STUDY PROTOCOL

Background: The incidence of malnutrition in patients with gastric cancer after surgery is 59%. The main reason for the high incidence of malnutrition is untimely nutrition screening and low compliance with nutrition treatment. In order to enable home patients to know their nutritional status in time, we have developed and validated nutritional risk screening tools for patients with gastric cancer to help patients’ at home find nutritional risks in time and seek medical help. This article introduces the development and verification methods and statistical methods of the tool.Methods: The development of self-nutrition risk screening tool for patients with gastric cancer after gastrectomy (SNRSGC) is divided into four parts：Steps1Identification of a potential referred nutritional risk screening; Steps2Item generation and scoring are selected through literature review methods to screen sensitive indicators that can reflect the nutritional characteristics of patients after gastric cancer surgery, establish the frame and update according to the latest guidelines ；Steps3Item reduction is determined by the rating of SNRSGC items by an expert panel and piloting method to determine the final item; Steps4 In the validation stage, we conducted research design based on the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist to evaluate the content validity, structure validity, interpretability, and retest validity of SNRSGC.Discussion: SNRSGC is the first screening tool specifically to predict nutrition risk for stay-at-home postoperative patients with gastric cancer.SNRSGC may provide action guidelines and knowledge guidance for patients with gastric cancer at home.Trial registration: Identifier on Chinese Clinical Trials Registry : ChiCTR2100041809 , registered January 06, 2021.

The Validity, Reliability, and Feasibility of Measurement Tools Used to Assess Sleep of Pre-school Aged Children: A Systematic Rapid Review

Background: Sleep of pre-school aged children is important for their health and development, but there are currently no standards for measuring sleep in this age group. We aimed to examine the validity, reliability and feasibility of tools used to assess sleep of pre-school aged children.Methods: Studies were eligible for inclusion if they examined the validity and/or reliability and/or feasibility of a measurement tool used to examine sleep of pre-school aged children (aged 3–7 years). We systematically searched six electronic databases, grey literature and trial registries. We manually searched topic specific journals, reference and citations of included studies, and reference lists of existing reviews. We extracted data and conducted a risk of bias assessment on the included studies using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias checklist. We used a narrative synthesis to present the results.Results: Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria: these explored accelerometers (n = 3) and parental reported tools (n = 13; nine questionnaires, six diaries). Studies assessed construct validity (n = 3), criterion validity (n = 1), convergent validity (n = 13), test-retest reliability (n = 2), internal consistency (n = 4) and feasibility (n = 12). Most studies assessed the convergent validity of questionnaires and diaries compared with accelerometers, but the validity of accelerometers for sleep in this age group is unknown. Of studies with a low risk of bias, one sleep diary was shown to be valid for measuring sleep duration. No measurement tools were appropriate for determining sleep quality. Reporting of reliability and feasibility was minimal.Discussion: The evidence base in this field is limited, and most studies had high risk of bias. Future research on sleep in pre-school aged children should focus on assessing the validity, reliability and feasibility of accelerometers, which in turn will improve the quality of studies that assess questionnaires and diaries against accelerometers.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021230900; PROSPERO: CRD42021230900.

Assessing Momentary Well-Being in People Living With Dementia: A Systematic Review of Observational Instruments

Optimizing the possibility to lead good lives is at the core of treatment and care for people with dementia. This may be monitored by assessing well-being and quality of life. However, cognitive impairment following dementia may complicate recall-based assessment with questionnaires, and proxy-ratings from family-caregivers do not correspond well to self-reports. Thus, using observational measures represents a potentially advanced option. Systematic reviews evaluating measurement properties, interpretability and feasibility of observational instruments assessing well-being in people living with dementia are lacking. Thus, this review performed systematic searches to find peer reviewed validated instruments of relevance in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and ProQuest. Twenty-two instruments assessing well-being were included for evaluation of measurement properties based on the systematic approach of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). The evaluation included risk of bias on study level, and assessment of measurement properties on instrument level including content validity, construct validity, structural validity, internal consistency, measurement invariance, cross-cultural validity, measurement error and inter-rater/intra-rater/test–retest reliability and responsiveness. Additionally, the feasibility and interpretability of the measures were evaluated. No single instrument could be recommended based on existing publications. Thus, we provide general recommendations about further assessment and development of these instruments. Finally, we describe the most promising instruments and offer guidance with respect to their implementation and use in clinical and research contexts.

Development of a core measurement set for research in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a study protocol (AO Spine RECODE-DCM CMS)

Introduction: Progress in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is hindered by inconsistent measurement and reporting of outcomes. This can, for example, impede the aggregation of data and comparison of outcomes between studies. This limitation can be reversed by developing a core measurement set (CMS) for use in DCM research. Previously, the AO Spine Research Objectives and Common Data Elements for DCM (AO Spine RECODE-DCM) defined what should be measured in DCM: specifically, the core data elements and core outcome set of the disease. The next step of this initiative is to determine how to measure these features. The current protocol outlines the steps necessary for the development of a CMS for DCM research and audit. Methods and analysis: The CMS will be developed in accordance with the guidance developed by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The process will involve five phases: (1) agreement on the measurement constructs and approaches to their evaluation; (2) the formation of a long list of potential measurement instruments, by identifying existing instruments and assessing their psychometric properties; (3) the aggregation of evidence concerning when measurements should be taken; (4) consensus about which instruments to include in the CMS and (5) implementation. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Cambridge. Dissemination strategies to promote awareness and adoption of the CMS include peer-reviewed scientific publications; conference presentations; podcasts; the identification of AO Spine RECODE-DCM ambassadors; and engagement with relevant journals, funders, and the DCM community.

Patient-Reported Questionnaires to Identify Adverse Drug Reactions: A Systematic Review

Background: This systematic review aims to summarise available patient-reported questionnaires to detect adverse drug reactions (ADRs) that can be utilised by healthcare professionals in clinical practice and to summarise the psychometric properties (validity, reliability, and responsiveness) of the questionnaires. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, Pubmed, Embase, and Emcare databases to screen for articles published between January 2000 and July 2020. Data items regarding validity, reliability, and responsiveness were extracted independently by two authors. The methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN (Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) checklist. Results: A total of 1563 unique article titles were identified after removing duplicates. Following shortlisting of relevant articles, 19 patient-reported ADR questionnaires were identified. Questionnaires most commonly focused on mental health medications (42.1%, n = 8), followed by general questionnaires applicable to any medication (21.1%, n = 4). Many questionnaires did not report assessing the validity and reliability of the measurement tool. For example, only 11 questionnaires (58%) mentioned assessing content validity, in addition to criterion or construct testing. Conclusion: This systematic review summarised the available patient-reported questionnaires that can be used in research and clinical practice to identify ADRs. Results of this systematic review highlight the need for more robust validity and reliability testing when developing patient-reported ADR questionnaires.