Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.
Mokkink, L B; de Vet, H C W; Prinsen, C A C; Patrick, D L; Alonso, J; Bouter, L M; Terwee, C B.
Afiliação
  • Mokkink LB; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. w.mokkink@vumc.nl.
  • de Vet HCW; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Prinsen CAC; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Patrick DL; Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
  • Alonso J; Health Services Research Unit, Institut Municipal d'Investigacio Medica (IMIM-Hospital del Mar), Barcelona, Spain.
  • Bouter LM; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
  • Terwee CB; Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Qual Life Res ; 27(5): 1171-1179, 2018 05.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29260445
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties.

METHODS:

For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis.

RESULTS:

Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system.

CONCLUSIONS:

The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Qualidade de Vida / Nível de Saúde / Lista de Checagem / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Qualidade de Vida / Nível de Saúde / Lista de Checagem / Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Holanda