Virtual Reality and Serious Videogame-Based Instruments for Assessing Spatial Navigation in Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties.

Over the past decade, research using virtual reality and serious game-based instruments for assessing spatial navigation and spatial memory in at-risk and AD populations has risen. We systematically reviewed the literature since 2012 to identify and evaluate the methodological quality and risk of bias in the analyses of the psychometric properties of VRSG-based instruments. The search was conducted primarily in July-December 2022 and updated in November 2023 in eight major databases. The quality of instrument development and study design were analyzed in all studies. Measurement properties were defined and analyzed according to COSMIN guidelines. A total of 1078 unique records were screened, and following selection criteria, thirty-seven studies were analyzed. From these studies, 30 instruments were identified. Construct and criterion validity were the most reported measurement properties, while structural validity and internal consistency evidence were the least reported. Nineteen studies were deemed very good in construct validity, whereas 11 studies reporting diagnostic accuracy were deemed very good in quality. Limitations regarding theoretical framework and research design requirements were found in most of the studies. VRSG-based instruments are valuable additions to the current diagnostic toolkit for AD. Further research is required to establish the psychometric performance and clinical utility of VRSG-based instruments, particularly the instrument development, content validity, and diagnostic accuracy for preclinical AD screening scenarios. This review provides a straightforward synthesis of the state of the art of VRSG-based instruments and suggests future directions for research.

Measurement properties of the Iranian version of the breast cancer perception scale (BCPS) according to the COSMIN checklist.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a prevalent cancer characterized by its aggressive nature and potential to cause mortality among women. The rising mortality rates and women's inadequate perception of the disease's severity in developing countries highlight the importance of screening using conventional methods and reliable scales. Since the validity and reliability of the breast cancer perception scale (BCPS) have not been established in the Iranian context. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the measurement properties of the BCPS in women residing in Tabriz, Iran. METHODS: The present study comprised a cross-sectional design, encompassing a sample of 372 Iranian women. The participants were selected through a multi-stage cluster random sampling technique conducted over a period spanning from November 2022 to February 2023. The measurement properties of the Iranian version of BCPS were assessed following the guidelines outlined in the COSMIN checklist. This involved conducting various steps, including the translation process, reliability testing (internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and measurement error), and methodological tests for validity (content validity, face validity, construct validity, and hypothesis testing). The study also investigated the factors of responsiveness and interpretability. The presence of floor and ceiling effects was assessed. RESULTS: The internal consistency of the scale was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, yielding a satisfactory value of 0.68. Additionally, McDonald's omega (95% CI) was computed, resulting in a value of 0.70 (0.66 to 0.74). Furthermore, the test-retest reliability was evaluated, revealing a high intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94 to 0.99). The CVI, CVR, and impact scores of the BCPS were determined to be 0.98, 0.95, and 3.70, respectively, indicating favorable levels of content and face validity. To assess construct validity, an examination of the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted on a set of 24 items. This analysis revealed the presence of six distinct factors, which collectively accounted for 52% of the cumulative variance. The fit indices of the validity model (CFI = 0.91, NFI = 0.96, RFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.90, χ2/df = 2.03, RMSEA = 0.055 and SRMR = 0.055) were confirmed during the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The overall score of BCPS exhibited a ceiling effect of 0.3%. The floor effect observed in the overall score (BCPS) was found to be 0.5%. Concerning the validation of the hypothesis, Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.55 was obtained between the BCPS and the QLICP-BR V2.0. This correlation value signifies a statistically significant association. Furthermore, it is worth noting that the minimum important change (MIC) of 3.92 exhibited a higher value compared to the smallest detectable change (SDC) of 3.70, thus suggesting a satisfactory level of response. CONCLUSIONS: The obtained findings suggest that the Iranian version of the BCPS demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties for assessing the perception of breast cancer among Iranian women. Furthermore, it exhibits favorable responsiveness to clinical variations. Consequently, it can serve as a screening instrument for healthcare professionals to comprehend breast cancer and as a reliable tool in research endeavors.

Psychometric Properties of General Oral Health Assessment Index Across Ages: COSMIN Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review the psychometric properties of the Geriatric Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) across age groups using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology. METHODS: Data: English peer-reviewed articles reporting studies of the development, translation, or validation of GOHAI. SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE from Jan 1990 until December 31, 2023. Methodological evaluation: based on COSMIN methodology. The results are presented overall and for 4 age groups (≥60 years, all ages, <60 years, ≤45 years). Structural validity was summarized qualitatively. Internal consistency and reliability were synthesized via random-effects meta-analysis of T-transformed Cronbach α values, and Fisher's Z transformed correlation coefficients. Construct validity and responsiveness were assessed using effect sizes. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-seven records were identified, 72 underwent full-text assessment, resulting in 60 included reports. Structural validity was inconsistent across all age groups and overall. Internal consistency was sufficient with overall α = 0.81, and high evidence quality. Test-retest reliability was consistently sufficient across age groups with overall r = 0.84. For construct validity 361 hypotheses were assessed (37.4% for convergent-, 62.6% for known-groups validity). The percentage of confirmed hypotheses in ≥60-years, all ages, <60-years and ≤45-years were 75.5%, 66.7%, 78.9%, and 88.9%, respectively. Responsiveness was not assessed in the <60-years and ≤45-years age groups, leading to indeterminate overall rating with very low evidence quality. CONCLUSIONS: This review affirms that GOHAI has sufficient psychometric properties as an oral health-related quality of life instrument in various age groups, but its responsiveness is scarcely researched and its utility for individual-level follow-up is limited. The measurement properties of oral health-related quality of life tools must be scrutinized in the changing demands of personalized and value-based dental care. (PROSPERO registration: CRD42022384132).

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024. METHODS: The development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement. RESULTS: From the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review's title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts. CONCLUSION: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application. NOTE: In order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Methodological quality of 100 recent systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments: an overview of reviews.

PURPOSE: Systematic reviews evaluating and comparing the measurement properties of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) play an important role in OMI selection. Earlier overviews of review quality (2007, 2014) evidenced substantial concerns with regards to alignment to scientific standards. This overview aimed to investigate whether the quality of recent systematic reviews of OMIs lives up to the current scientific standards. METHODS: One hundred systematic reviews of OMIs published from June 1, 2021 onwards were randomly selected through a systematic literature search performed on March 17, 2022 in MEDLINE and EMBASE. The quality of systematic reviews was appraised by two independent reviewers. An updated data extraction form was informed by the earlier studies, and results were compared to these earlier studies' findings. RESULTS: A quarter of the reviews had an unclear research question or aim, and in 22% of the reviews the search strategy did not match the aim. Half of the reviews had an incomprehensive search strategy, because relevant search terms were not included. In 63% of the reviews (compared to 41% in 2014 and 30% in 2007) a risk of bias assessment was conducted. In 73% of the reviews (some) measurement properties were evaluated (58% in 2014 and 55% in 2007). In 60% of the reviews the data were (partly) synthesized (42% in 2014 and 7% in 2007); evaluation of measurement properties and data syntheses was not conducted separately for subscales in the majority. Certainty assessments of the quality of the total body of evidence were conducted in only 33% of reviews (not assessed in 2014 and 2007). The majority (58%) did not make any recommendations on which OMI (not) to use. CONCLUSION: Despite clear improvements in risk of bias assessments, measurement property evaluation and data synthesis, specifying the research question, conducting the search strategy and performing a certainty assessment remain poor. To ensure that systematic reviews of OMIs meet current scientific standards, more consistent conduct and reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs is needed.

Measurement properties of the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Large numbers of people are subject to alterations and pathologies in the foot. To quantify how these problems of foot function affect the quality of life, clinicians and researchers have developed measures such as the Foot Function Index (FFI). Our aim is to determine the methodological quality of the FFI including adaptations to other languages. DATA SOURCES: The studies considered in this review were extracted from the PubMed, Embase and CINAHL databases. The inclusion criteria were followed: (1) studies of patients with no previous foot or ankle pathology and aged over 18 years; (2) based on English-language patient-reported outcome measures that assess foot function; (3) the patient-reported outcome measures should present measurement properties based on COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) criteria. REVIEW METHODS: The systematic review was conducted following the COSMIN criteria to establish the methodological quality of the original FFI, together with its variants and adaptations. The last search was carried out in May 2024. RESULTS: Of the 1994 studies obtained in the preliminary search, 20 were eligible for inclusion in the final analysis. These results are the validations and cross-cultural adaptations to the following languages: the original FFI has cross-cultural adaptation in 13 languages and the FFI-Revised Short Form has been adapted and validated for use in 2 languages. CONCLUSION: In terms of methodological quality, the FFI-Revised Short Form questionnaire is a valuable instrument for evaluating ankle and foot function and could usefully be expanded to be available in more languages.

Quality assessment of patient-reported outcome measures for patients with multiple ear complaints.

INTRODUCTION: There is an increased demand for well-validated PROMs in otology. This study will systematically assess the methodological quality of all published patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) for patients with multiple ear complaints and to identify the best suitable PROM for use by clinicians treating patients with multiple ear complaints. METHODS: An extensive systematic mapping review of all otology questionnaires was performed to identify questionnaires measuring multiple ear complaints. The 'Consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement Instruments' (COSMIN) checklists were used to evaluate the quality of the questionnaire by two researchers. The worst item score per aspect of the methodological assessment counted. RESULTS: Twelve multiple-complaint questionnaires were included in the study for quality assessment. Ten questionnaires were disease-specific (COMQ-12, CES, ZCMEI-21, MD-POSI, PAN-QOL, ETDQ-7, MDOQ, GYSSCDQ, COMOT-15 and DEU-MDDS). Two questionnaires were ear domain-specific (OQUA and COQOL). The majority of multiple complaint questionnaires lacked good design with concept elicitation and patient involvement. CONCLUSION: For the majority of questionnaires, the quality assessment was inadequate as only a few authors consulted with patients affected by the complaints in the development. Modifications of earlier versions of PROMS or combinations of multiple questionnaires lead to ongoing (cross-cultural) validation of these questionnaires albeit mediocre design and validation. The two domain-specific questionnaires are the COQOL and OQUA, both with adequate quality but different focus. COQOL to quantify the quality of life and OQUA to measure and evaluate the severity and impact of ear complaints. [Correction added on 26 January 2024, after first online publication: In the preceding sentence, the spelling of the abbreviation COQOL has been corrected in this version.].

Assessment tools for stigma in breast cancer patients based on COSMIN guidelines: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the measurement properties and methodological quality of stigma assessment tools designed for breast cancer patients. The aim was to provide clinical medical staff with a foundation for selecting high-quality assessment tools. METHODS: A comprehensive computer search was carried out across various databases, including SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, China Science and Technology Journal Database(VIP), Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus, which were searched from the inception of the databases until March 20, 2023. Literature screening and data extraction were performed independently by two researchers, adhering to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The assessment tools were evaluated using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic evaluation guidelines. RESULTS: In the final analysis, a total of 9 assessment tools were included. However, none of these tools addressed measurement error, cross-cultural validity, criterion validity, and responsiveness. Following the COSMIN guidelines, BCSS and CSPDS were assigned to Class A recommendations, while the remaining tools received Class B recommendations. CONCLUSION: The BCSS and CSPDS scales demonstrated comprehensive assessment in terms of their measurement characteristics, exhibiting good methodological quality, measurement attribute quality, and supporting evidence. Therefore, it is recommended to utilize these scales for evaluating breast cancer stigma. However, further validation is required for the remaining assessment tools.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the measurement properties of concerns-about-falling instruments in older people and people at increased risk of falls.

BACKGROUND: The 16-item Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) is widely used to assess concerns-about-falling. Variants include 7-item Short FES-I, 30-item Iconographical Falls Efficacy Scale (Icon FES) and 10-item short Icon FES. No comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted to synthesise evidence regarding the measurement properties of these tools. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the measurement properties of four FES-I variants. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched systematically and articles were assessed for eligibility independently. The methodological quality of eligible studies was assessed using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. The quality of measurement properties was assessed using COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties. Where possible, meta-analysis was conducted; otherwise, narrative synthesis was performed. Overall certainty of evidence was rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system approach. RESULTS: The review included 58 studies investigating measurement properties of the four instruments. There was high-quality evidence to support internal consistency, reliability and construct validity of all instruments. Moderate- to high-certainty evidence suggests one-factor structure of FES-I with two underlying dimensions, one-factor structure of Short FES-I and two-factor structure of Icon FES. There was high-certainty evidence to support the responsiveness of FES-I, with further research needed for the other instruments. CONCLUSION: There is evidence for excellent measurement properties of all four instruments. We recommend the use of these tools with healthy older people and people at a greater risk of falls due to conditions that might affect mobility and balance.

Patient-reported outcome measures for uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review of the quality of existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in women with uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) applying the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to derive recommendations for their use in future research. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science. Studies reporting on the development and/or validation of any PROMs for uncomplicated UTIs in women were considered eligible. We evaluated the methodological quality of each included study using the COSMIN Risk of Bias Checklist, and further applied predefined criteria for good measurement properties. Finally, we graded the evidence and derived recommendations for the use of the included PROMs. RESULTS: Data from 23 studies reporting on six PROMs were included. From those, the Acute Cystitis Symptom Score (ACSS) and the Urinary Tract Infection-Symptom and Impairment Questionnaire (UTI-SIQ-8) can be recommended for further use. Both instruments showed sufficient content validity. We further found high-quality evidence for sufficient internal consistency of the UTI-SIQ-8, while this criterion was not assessed for the ACSS due to a formative measurement model. All other PROMs have the potential to be recommended for use, but require further validation. CONCLUSION: The ACSS and the UTI-SIQ-8 have the potential to be recommended for use in women with uncomplicated UTIs in future clinical trials. For all included PROMs, further validation studies are indicated. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO.

Instruments measuring practitioner performance of the complete examination and screening of neonates: A systematic review.

AIM: The complete examination and screening of the neonate is a recommended assessment of neonatal well-being conducted by appropriately trained medical, midwifery and nursing personnel at specific intervals during the first 6-week post-birth. Our aim was to identify and critically evaluate instruments that measure practitioner performance of this important assessment of neonatal health. METHODS: Using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology, a systematic review was undertaken. RESULTS: Four studies were identified as suitable for data extraction and analysis. This paper briefly describes the four instruments, discusses and compares the COSMIN analysis and ratings of each instrument. A recommendation for the instrument identified as the most suitable to measure practitioner performance is provided. CONCLUSION: Most instruments were designed by educators to measure the performance of practitioners developing competence in the complete examination and screening of the neonate. Further development and piloting of instruments designed to measure the performance and continuing competence of qualified practitioners of the newborn examination are required.

The Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey (MOS-SSS): A psychometric systematic review.

AIMS: To evaluate and synthesize psychometric properties of the MOS-SSS and to identify quality versions of MOS-SSS for use in future research and practice. DESIGN: A psychometric systematic review. DATA SOURCES: Articles about the translation, adaptation, or validation of the MOS-SSS in Medline, PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science and their reference lists published before 11 November 2022. REVIEW METHODS: The review followed the Consensus Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments guidelines. RESULTS: The review included 35 articles. Eleven versions of MOS-SSS (3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, and 22 items) have been validated in various populations and 13 languages. Of 14 studies developing a translated version of MOS-SSS, four studies performed both an experts' evaluation of content validity and a face validity test; two studies reported translation evaluation in the form of a content validity index. Of 35 studies, six performed both exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis for structural validity; hypotheses and measurements for construct validity testings were often not clearly stated; two examined criterion validity; and four assessed cross-cultural validity. Internal consistency reliabilities were commonly examined by calculating Cronbach's alpha and reported satisfactory. Five studies analysed test-retest reliabilities using intra correlation coefficient. Methodological concerns exist. CONCLUSION: The English 19-item, Farsi Persian 19-item, and Vietnamese 19-item versions are recommended for future use in research and practice. Italian 19-item and Malaysian 13-item versions are not recommended to be used in future research and practice. All other versions considered in this review have potential use in future research and practice. Proper procedures for developing a translated version of MOS-SSS and validating the scale are recommended. IMPACT: The review identified quality versions of MOS-SSS to measure social support in future research and practice. The study also indicated methodological issues in current validation studies. Application of the study findings and recommendations can be useful to improve outcome measurement quality and maximize the efficiency of resource use in future research and practice. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This systematic review synthesized the evidence from previous research and did not involve any human participation.

A systematic review of the measurement properties of self-care scales in nurses.

BACKGROUND: Self-care is a necessary measure against occupational injuries of nurses and improves nursing performance at the bedside. Nurses have different scales to measure self-care, and researchers are confused about choosing valid and reliable scales. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of self-care scales in nurses to identify the best available scales. METHODS: Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and ProQuest) were systematically searched, with no date limiters, until 9 Jun 2023. A manual search was performed with Google Scholar and the reference list of articles to complete the search. Studies aiming to develop or determine the measurement properties of self-care in nurses were included. Based on Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments, the methodological quality of the studies was determined, and the result of each study on a measurement property was rated (sufficient, insufficient, or indeterminate). The quality of the evidence was graded using a modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach (high, moderate, low, or very low). These processes were used to make recommendations and identify the best scale to assess self-care in nurses. RESULTS: Out of 8601 articles, six articles with five different scales were included. Only internal consistency was reported across all scales. Criterion validity, measurement error, responsiveness, feasibility, and interpretability, were not reported in any of them. Content validity was reported only in two studies with inconsistent results and low-quality evidence. None of the scales had methodological quality with a rating of very good and sufficient high-quality evidence for all measurement properties. CONCLUSIONS: None of the scales is strongly recommended to measure self-care in nurses. Only the Professional self-care scale is temporarily recommended until their quality is assessed in future studies. Considering that the content of the examined scales does not meet all the professional self-care needs of nurses, designing a valid, reliable, and specialized scale for nurses is needed.

Instruments for measuring nursing research competence: a COSMIN-based scoping review.

AIM: The aim of this scoping review was to evaluate and summarise the measurement properties of nursing research competence instruments and provide a summary overview of the use of nursing research competence instruments. BACKGROUND: Increasing nursing research competence instruments have been developed. However, a systematic review and evaluation of nursing research competence instruments is lacking. METHOD: This scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute updated methodology for scoping reviews and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. Reviewers searched articles in Eight English databases and two Chinese databases between April 1st, 2022, and April 30th, 2022. An updated literature search was conducted between March 1st and March 4th, 2023. The literature screening and data extraction were conducted by two reviewers, independently. A third reviewer was involved when consensus was needed. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments methodology was used to evaluate the methodological quality and measurement properties of the nursing research competence instruments. RESULTS: Ten studies involving eight nursing research competence instruments were included. None of the existing instruments have assessed all measurement properties. A total of 177 empirical studies have utilized a nursing research competence instrument with tested measurement properties. CONCLUSION: 'Self-evaluated Nursing Research Capacity of Questionnaire (refined)' was identified as the most appropriate nursing research competence instrument in existing instruments. However, reviewers need to conduct further measurement properties studies on the existing nursing research competence instruments. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE NURSING POLICY: This study could guide the selection of appropriate nursing research competence instruments which could help to evaluate the nursing research competence of nurses and inform the development of intervention plans to enhance nursing research competence.

Investigating quality of life instrument measurement properties for adults with active venous leg ulcers: A systematic review.

The primary objective of this systematic review was to identify which quality of life instruments have been applied in published studies of patients with active venous leg ulcers. Our secondary objective was to map the measurement properties of each identified quality of life instrument and to inform future recommendations for clinical practice and research. We searched CINAHL, Ovid Medline, Ovid Emcare and ProQuest to identify studies published from 1 January 2000 to 31 July 2021. Eleven studies that utilised quality of life instruments in adults with active venous leg ulcers met the inclusion criteria. Thirteen quality of life instruments were identified as some studies utilised both generic and condition-specific quality of life instruments. Six out of nine (6/9) instruments were rated 'very good' of methodological quality on internal consistency; 1/7 studies rated 'adequate' on reliability; 2/4 rated 'adequate' on content validity; 3/6 studies rated 'adequate' on structural validity; 5/6 rated 'adequate' on hypotheses testing for construct and 2/6 studies rated 'adequate' on responsiveness. There is limited evidence of measurement properties of quality of life instruments for people with active venous leg ulcers. The Venous Leg Ulcer Quality of Life Questionnaire (VLU-QoL) could be provisionally recommended for use although from our review it is clear further studies to assess VLU-QoL measurement properties are needed to inform future recommendations for clinical practice and research.

Utility of unidimensional and functional pain assessment tools in adult postoperative patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to appraise the evidence relating to the measurement properties of unidimensional tools to quantify pain after surgery. Furthermore, we wished to identify the tools used to assess interference of pain with functional recovery. METHODS: Four electronic sources (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched in August 2020. Two reviewers independently screened articles and assessed risk of bias using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies with a total of 12 498 participants were included. Most of the studies failed to meet the methodological quality standards required by COSMIN. Studies of unidimensional assessment tools were underpinned by low-quality evidence for reliability (five studies), and responsiveness (seven studies). Convergent validity was the most studied property (13 studies) with moderate to high correlation ranging from 0.5 to 0.9 between unidimensional tools. Interpretability results were available only for the visual analogue scale (seven studies) and numerical rating scale (four studies). Studies on functional assessment tools were scarce; only one study included an 'Objective Pain Score,' a tool assessing pain interference with respiratory function, and it had low-quality for convergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review challenges the validity and reliability of unidimensional tools in adult patients after surgery. We found no evidence that any one unidimensional tool has superior measurement properties in assessing postoperative pain. In addition, because promoting function is a crucial perioperative goal, psychometric validation studies of functional pain assessment tools are needed to improve pain assessment and management. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020213495.

A review of the content and psychometric properties of cancer-related fatigue (CRF) measures used to assess fatigue in intervention studies.

PURPOSE: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is a common and debilitating consequence of cancer and its treatment. Numerous supportive care interventions have been developed to alleviate CRF; however, the diversity of outcome measures used to assess CRF limits comparability of findings. We aimed to evaluate the content and psychometric properties of measures used to assess CRF in interventions targeting fatigue, to inform the selection of suitable measures in future research. METHODS: Included measures were identified from a systematic review of interventions targeting CRF. General characteristics of each measure were extracted, and item content was assessed against domains specified by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) definition of CRF. Psychometric properties were evaluated against COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of heath Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. RESULTS: Of 54 measures identified, 25 met inclusion criteria. Seventeen were fatigue-specific and eight a fatigue subscale or single item within a broader measure. Only 14 (56%) were specifically developed for cancer populations. Content coverage according to the NCCN CRF definition ranged from 0 to 75%. Evidence for fulfilment of COSMIN criteria in cancer populations ranged from 0 to 93%, with only five measures meeting > 70% of the COSMIN criteria. CONCLUSION: The Piper Fatigue Scale-Revised had good content coverage, but did not comprehensively address COSMIN criteria. The EORTC-FA12 and FACIT/FACT-F had excellent psychometric properties, with each capturing different aspects of fatigue. Ultimately, the choice of CRF measure should be guided by the research question and the CRF domains most relevant to the particular research context.

The patient-reported outcomes measurement information systems (PROMIS®) physical function and its derivative measures in adults: a systematic review of content validity.

PURPOSE: This study aims to systematically review and critically appraise the content validity of the adult versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) item bank and its derivative measures in any adult population. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in October 2021 for studies on measurement properties of PROMIS-PF measures in an adult population. Studies were included if the study described the development of a PROMIS-PF measure or investigated its relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Assessment of the methodological quality of eligible studies, rating of results, and summarizing evidence was performed following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing content validity. A modified GRADE approach was used to determine the level of evidence. RESULTS: Three development studies and eight studies on the content validity of one or more of the PROMIS-PF measures were identified. The methodological quality of most studies was rated doubtful. There was low to high level evidence for sufficient relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of most PROMIS-PF measures for healthy seniors and various disease populations. We found low to moderate level evidence for insufficient relevance of PROMIS-PF measures for patients with conditions that affected only one body part, and insufficient comprehensibility of the PROMIS-PF measures for minority elderly. CONCLUSION: Most PROMIS-PF measures demonstrate sufficient content validity in healthy seniors and various disease populations. However, the quality of this evidence is generally low to moderate, due to limitations in the methodological quality of the studies.

Patient-reported outcome measures of musculoskeletal symptoms and psychosocial factors in musicians: a systematic review of psychometric properties.

PURPOSE: To systematically review patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of musicians' musculoskeletal symptoms (MSS) and psychosocial factors and their psychometric properties. METHODS: Six databases were searched. Studies evaluating at least one psychometric property of a PROM developed for or adapted to adult musicians and measuring MSS or occupational psychosocial factors were included. Study quality was evaluated using mainly the COSMIN checklist. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included, yielding 27 PROMs. Most COSMIN scores are Doubtful or Inadequate. Validity and internal consistency are the most evaluated psychometric properties. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in five studies (all inadequate sample sizes), measurement error in one, and responsiveness in none. The English, German and Polish Musculoskeletal Pain Intensity and Interference Questionnaire for professional orchestra Musicians (MPIIQM), the 40-item English and Peruvian Spanish Kenny Music Performance Anxiety Inventory (KMPAI) and the Psychosocial Risks Questionnaire for Musicians (PRQM, Polish) are the most robust scales for their constructs. Their internal consistency is sufficient (Cronbach's α ≥ 0.70). Test-retest reliability and construct validity are only sufficient for the German MPIIQM (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ 0.70). However, results are based on one study per PROM; all require further validation before validity, reliability and responsiveness can be confirmed. CONCLUSION: Due to generally poor methodological quality and one study per PROM on average, none can be confirmed valid, reliable and responsive. Yet, preliminary validation recommends prudent use of some PROMs pending further validation. Robust PROM studies are needed to fill the important literature gap regarding musician-specific, validated PROMs.