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.

Measuring and Manipulating the Rhine River Branches: Interactions of Theory and Embodied Understanding in Eighteenth Century River Hydraulics.

Eighteenth century river hydraulics used both theory and measurement to address problems of flood safety, navigation and defense related to the rivers. In the late eighteenth century the Dutch overseer of the rivers, Christiaan Brunings, integrated hydraulic theory and meteorological practices, which enabled him to design a unique instrument for measuring river flow. The question is whether the unprecedented detail of measurements fits the putative empirical stance in the eighteenth century. The interactions between theory, instrument, measurement, and other knowledge practices are here assessed using experiences in similar measurement practices. I argue that Brunings had theoretical and embodied understanding of hydrodynamics, as he knew how to design an instrument for flow measurement of sufficient accuracy for his purpose in the sociopolitical context of river management.

New indicator for discordance between patient-reported and traditional disease activity outcomes in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To unravel disease impact in early RA by separately quantifying patient-reported (PRF), clinical (CF) and laboratory (LF) factors. We propose a new indicator, the discordance score (DS), for early identification and prediction of patient's unmet needs and of future achievement of sustained remission (SR) and RA-related quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Factor-scores obtained by factor analysis in the CareRA trial, allowed to compute DS, reflecting the difference between PRF and the mean of CF and LF. Improvement from baseline to week 104 (%) and area-under-the-curve (AUC) across time points per factor-score were calculated and compared between patients achieving/not achieving sustained (week 16-104) remission (DAS28CRP < 2.6) with ANOVA. Logistic and linear regressions were used to predict SR based on previous factor and discordance scores, and QoL at year 1 and 2 based on DS at week 16. RESULTS: PRF, CF and LF scores improved rapidly within 8 weeks. PRF improved 57%, CF 90% and LF 27%, in those achieving SR, compared with 32% (PRF: P = 0.13), 77% (CF: P < 0.001) and 9% (LF: P = 0.36) in patients not achieving SR. Patients achieving SR had an AUC of 15.7, 3.4 and 4.8 for PRF, CF and LF, respectively, compared with 33.2, 10.1 and 7.2 in participants not achieving SR (P < 0.001 for all). Early discordance was associated with later factor scores, QoL and self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: All factor scores improved rapidly, especially in patients achieving sustained remission. Patient-reported burden improved less. Discordance scores could help predicting the need for additional non-pharmacological interventions to achieve sustained remission and decrease disease impact.

Assessment of Dementia Knowledge Scale for the Nursing Profession and the General Population: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Validation.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of dementia is increasing dramatically worldwide. It is important to determine knowledge about the dementia for it's prevention, early diagnosis, treatment, and care. The psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale (DKAS-T) were evaluated in this study. METHODS: The psychometric study was conducted. A total of 1592 participants were recruited between November 2019 and March 2020. The data were collected using a sociodemographic form and DKAS-T. The language and content validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were used to assess the validity of the scale. The scale's reliability was obtained using Cronbach's alpha coefficient, a paired sample t-test, item-total score correlation, and Hotelling's T-squared test. RESULTS: The mean age of the sample was 29.38 (±11.50) years; 66.8% (n = 1064) were female, and 54.1% (n = 861) reported their income status as income equal to expenditure. The DKAS-T demonstrated content validity and adequate sensitivity (Kendall W = 0.155, p = 0.093). The scale consisted of seventeen items and was unidimensional, which explained 28.705% of the variance. All the factor loadings were found to be >0.30 in factor analysis. In CFA, all of the fit indexes were >0.95 and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) was 0.033. A Cronbach's alpha value of 0.836 was obtained for the entire scale. It was determined that the scale has invariance according to time (t = -1.362, p = 0.181). Homogeneity of the scale was 3.26%, and there was no absence of reaction bias (Hotelling's T-squared = 2573.681, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The results demonstrated that the instrument is reliable and generates valid data for the Turkish sample. This scale can be used to determine knowledge about dementia and planning educational interventions in the issue.

Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Patient-Reported Experience Measures Within Evaluation Studies of Telemedicine Applications: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: With the rise of digital health technologies and telemedicine, the need for evidence-based evaluation is growing. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are recommended as an essential part of the evaluation of telemedicine. For the first time, a systematic review has been conducted to investigate the use of PROMs and PREMs in the evaluation studies of telemedicine covering all application types and medical purposes. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the following research questions: in which scenarios are PROMs and PREMs collected for evaluation purposes, which PROM and PREM outcome domains have been covered and how often, which outcome measurement instruments have been used and how often, does the selection and quantity of PROMs and PREMs differ between study types and application types, and has the use of PROMs and PREMs changed over time. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases and included studies published from inception until April 2, 2020. We included studies evaluating telemedicine with patients as the main users; these studies reported PROMs and PREMs within randomized controlled trials, controlled trials, noncontrolled trials, and feasibility trials in English and German. RESULTS: Of the identified 2671 studies, 303 (11.34%) were included; of the 303 studies, 67 (22.1%) were feasibility studies, 70 (23.1%) were noncontrolled trials, 20 (6.6%) were controlled trials, and 146 (48.2%) were randomized controlled trials. Health-related quality of life (n=310; mean 1.02, SD 1.05), emotional function (n=244; mean 0.81, SD 1.18), and adherence (n=103; mean 0.34, SD 0.53) were the most frequently assessed outcome domains. Self-developed PROMs were used in 21.4% (65/303) of the studies, and self-developed PREMs were used in 22.3% (68/303). PROMs (n=884) were assessed more frequently than PREMs (n=234). As the evidence level of the studies increased, the number of PROMs also increased (τ=-0.45), and the number of PREMs decreased (τ=0.35). Since 2000, not only has the number of studies using PROMs and PREMs increased, but the level of evidence and the number of outcome measurement instruments used have also increased, with the number of PREMs permanently remaining at a lower level. CONCLUSIONS: There have been increasingly more studies, particularly high-evidence studies, which use PROMs and PREMs to evaluate telemedicine. PROMs have been used more frequently than PREMs. With the increasing maturity stage of telemedicine applications and higher evidence level, the use of PROMs increased in line with the recommendations of evaluation guidelines. Health-related quality of life and emotional function were measured in almost all the studies. Simultaneously, health literacy as a precondition for using the application adequately, alongside proper training and guidance, has rarely been reported. Further efforts should be pursued to standardize PROM and PREM collection in evaluation studies of telemedicine.

Comparison of screening accuracy of the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 using two case-identification methods during pregnancy and postpartum.

BACKGROUND: Variation exists regarding perinatal depression screening. A two-step screening method has been recommended. According to a maternity-focused core outcome set developed by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement, women who score 3 or more on the PHQ-2 then complete the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Limited evidence exists regarding the screening accuracy of the PHQ-2 in childbearing women. An alternative case-identification method may be more sensitive for perinatal women. We aimed to [1] evaluate the screening accuracy of the PHQ-2 during the perinatal period using two case-identification methods, and [2] measure the variability of accuracy over four time-points during pregnancy and postpartum. METHODS: A prospective, longitudinal cohort study was conducted with 309 consecutive women who completed the PHQ-2 and EPDS during pregnancy (booking, 36-weeks) and postpartum (6-, 26-weeks). EPDS was the reference standard using cut-off scores for 'at least probable minor depression' during pregnancy (≥ 13) and postpartum (≥ 10) and for 'probable major depression' during pregnancy (≥ 15) and postpartum (≥ 13). PHQ-2 was analysed using two methods: [1] scored (cut-points ≥ 2 and ≥ 3), [2] dichotomous yes/no (positive response to either question) against EPDS cut-points for at least probable minor and probable major depression. Receiver operating characteristic analyses determined accuracy. RESULTS: Probable major depression: Over four timepoints PHQ-2 ≥ 3 revealed lowest sensitivity (36-79%) but highest specificity (94-98%). An alternative case-identification method revealed high sensitivity (93-100%), but lowest specificity (58-71%). Minor depression: PHQ-2 ≥ 3 revealed the lowest sensitivity (19-50%) but highest specificity (95-98%). An alternative case-identification method revealed the highest sensitivity (81-100%) and moderate specificity (60-74%). CONCLUSIONS: Recommended method of case-identification (PHQ-2 ≥ 3) missed an unacceptable number of women at-risk of depression. As a clinical decision-making tool, an alternative, dichotomous method maximized case-identification and is recommended. Further, the literature identified inconsistent reporting of the PHQ-2 and the alternative case-identification method hindering the ability to synthesise data. The future use and reporting of consistent question wording and response format will improve outcome reporting and synthesis. Further research in larger and diverse maternity populations is recommended.

Use and perceived added value of patient-reported measurement instruments by physiotherapists treating acute low back pain: a survey study among Dutch physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to explore (i) physiotherapists' current use in daily practice of patient-reported measurement instruments (screening tools and questionnaires) for patients with acute low back pain (LBP), (ii) the underlying reasons for using these instruments, (iii) their perceived influence on clinical decision-making, and (iv) the association with physiotherapist characteristics (gender, physiotherapy experience, LBP experience, overall e-health affinity). METHODS: Survey study among Dutch physiotherapists in a primary care setting. A sample of 650 physiotherapists recruited from LBP-related and regional primary care networks received the survey between November 2018 and January 2019, of which 85 (13%) completed it. RESULTS: Nearly all responding physiotherapists (98%) reported using screening tools or other measurement instruments in cases of acute LBP; the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (64%) and the STarT Back Screening Tool (61%) are used most frequently. These instruments are primarily used to evaluate treatment effect (53%) or assess symptoms (51%); only 35% of the respondents mentioned a prognostic purpose. Almost three-quarters (72%) reported that the instrument only minimally impacted their clinical decision-making in cases of acute LBP. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey indicates that physiotherapists frequently use patient-reported measurement instruments in cases of acute LBP, but mostly for non-prognostic reasons. Moreover, physiotherapists seem to feel that current instruments have limited added value for clinical decision-making. Possibly, a new measurement instrument (e.g., screening tool) needs to be developed that does fit the physiotherapist's needs and preferences. Our findings also suggest that physiotherapist may need to be more critical about which measurement instrument they use and for which purpose.

Measuring the therapeutic properties of nursing home environments in the Italian context: findings from a validation and cross-sectional study design.

BACKGROUND: The social and the physical features of the nursing home (NH) environment can offer a therapeutic support capable of maximising residents' physical and cognitive functions. A total of 23 instruments evaluating the therapeutic properties of a NH has been documented to date; among them, the most recent and widely used is the Therapeutic Environment Screening Survey for Nursing Homes (TESS-NH) composed of 13 domains and 84 items: higher scores in each domain indicate a higher presence of therapeutic principles. Validating the Italian version of TESS-NH tool and describing the therapeutic properties of Italian NH environments were the aims of this study. STUDY DESIGN: A validation and a cross-sectional study design, undertaken in 2017. METHODS: After having ensured the cross-cultural and the conceptual equivalence, together with the face and the content validation, 13 NHs accounting for 1,161 beds and articulated in 31 units have been evaluated with the TESS-NH tool via direct observation by trained researchers. Inter-rater reliability, test-retest, criterion validity, inter-dimension correlations and internal consistency were measured. Descriptive statistics was also calculated. RESULTS: The inter-rater reliability was Pearson (r) >0.917 for continuous variables and weighted kappa statistics (k) of > 0.779 for non-continuous variables; the test-retest reliability was r > 0.848 and k of > 0.778, respectively. The criterion validity was r > 0.500 between each dimension and the single TESS-NH global item; moreover, correlations among the domains varied from not significant to significantly strong, while the internal consistency resulted in all evaluable dimensions in Cronbach alpha > 0.600. In the involved NH units, the TESS-NH total score was on average 122.19 out of the possible score from 0 to 149 (confidence interval (CI) 95%, 115.89-128.49). 25% of the units (=7) reported a total score of ≤ 113, and another 25% reported scores ≥ 133, thus from poor to excellent therapeutic properties. CONCLUSION: The TESS-NH tool can be used in Italian facilities to support managers and researchers in evaluating the therapeutic properties of NH environments. Furthermore, the tool can support the evaluation of the effectiveness of interventional studies or quality improvement projects aimed at improving the NH's environment.

Development of a measure of genome sequencing knowledge for young people: The kids-KOGS.

Genome sequencing (GS) is increasingly being used to diagnose rare diseases in paediatric patients; however, no measures exist to evaluate their knowledge of this technology. We aimed to develop a robust measure of knowledge of GS (the kids-KOGS') suitable for use in the paediatric setting as well as for general public education. The target age was 11 to 15 year olds. An iterative process involving six sequential stages was conducted to develop a set of draft true/false items. These were then administered to 539 target-age school pupils (mean 12.8; SD ± 1.3), from the United Kingdom. Item-response theory was used to confirm the psychometric suitability of the candidate items. None of the Items was identified as misfits. All 10 items performed well under the two-parameter logistic model. The internal consistency of the test was 0.84 (Cronbach alpha value) indicating excellent reliability. The mean kids-KOGS score in the sample overall was 4.24 (SD; 2.49), where 0 = low knowledge and 10 = high knowledge. Age was positively associated with score in a multivariate linear regression. The kids-KOGS is a short and reliable tool that can be used by researchers and healthcare professionals offering GS to paediatric patients. Further validation in a clinical setting is required.

Systematic review of the measurement properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21 by applying updated COSMIN methodology.

PURPOSE: The Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS)-21 measures emotional symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress, is relatively short, and is freely available in the public domain, which has resulted in it being applied to various clinical and non-clinical populations in many countries. The aim of this study was to systematically review the measurement properties of the DASS-21. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases were searched. The methodological quality of each identified study was assessed using the updated COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. The quality of the measurement properties of the studies was rated using the updated criteria for good measurement properties. The quality of evidence was rated using a modified version of the GRADE approach. RESULTS: This study included 48 studies in its review. The content validity of the DASS-21 demonstrated sufficient moderate-quality evidence. The instrument exhibited sufficient high-quality evidence for bifactor structural validity and internal consistency. The instrument also showed sufficient high-quality evidence for hypothesis testing of construct validity. Regarding criterion validity, only the DASS-21 Depression subscale demonstrated sufficient high-quality evidence. The measurement invariance across gender demonstrated inconsistent moderate-quality evidence. There was insufficient low-quality evidence for the reliability of each subscale. For responsiveness there was sufficient low-quality evidence for depression and stress subscales, and insufficient very-low-quality evidence for anxiety subscale. CONCLUSIONS: The DASS-21 demonstrated sufficient high-quality evidence for bifactor structural validity, internal consistency (bifactor), criterion validity (Depression subscale), and hypothesis testing for construct validity. Further studies are required to assess the other measurement properties of the DASS-21.

Cross-cultural adaptation, internal consistency, test-retest reliability and feasibility of the German version of the evidence-based practice inventory.

BACKGROUND: A psychometrically robust measurement instrument is prerequisite to tailor and monitor interventions aiming to improve evidence-based practice (EBP). The recently developed "Evidence-based Practice Inventory" (EBPI) questionnaire (five dimensions) provides a sound inventory for a comprehensive assessment of adherence to EBP, and identification of barriers and facilitators for EBP. The aims of this study were to establish a German language version of the EBPI and to examine the instrument's reliability in a diverse sample of healthcare professionals. METHODS: The English version of the EBPI was translated, adopted and subsequently test-retest reliability of the German language EBPI was examined in a nationwide online survey. Participants working in Germany were invited to complete the questionnaire twice. For each EBPI dimension, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and the relative test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) were calculated. The standard error of measurement, limits of agreement and minimal detectable change values were estimated to quantify measurement error. RESULTS: A German language version of the EBPI was established. In the online survey, the EBPI was initially completed by 889 healthcare professionals. At follow-up, 344 individuals (39%) completed the questionnaire (74% female; mean work experience: 13.6 years). The ICCs for the five dimensions varied between 0.78 and 0.86. The standard error of measurement varied between 6.5 and 8.8% of the respective dimension scale range, and the limits of agreement between 24 and 37%. For internal consistency reliability, alpha varied between 0.64 and 0.90. There were neither floor nor ceiling effects, nor any other relevant feasibility issues. CONCLUSIONS: The German language EBPI can be used to assess EBP adherence of healthcare professionals in clinical practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators for an EBP conform behaviour. Results on test-retest reliability indicate that the EBPI produces reliable scores when used for group comparisons, but the questionnaire seems insufficiently reliable for individual measurements over time. Methods of item response theory or Rasch measurement theory should be used for further evaluation and revision of the EBPI, informed by the results of this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00013792 ). Registered 19 January 2018.

Development and psychometric testing of an inventory to measure patient-centred care in dietetic practice - dietitian version.

BACKGROUND: The lack of a valid instrument to measure patient-centred care (PCC) in dietetic practice makes it challenging to evaluate how patient-centred dietitians are. The present study aimed to develop and psychometrically test a dietitian-reported inventory to measure PCC in dietetic practice. METHODS: The inventory was compiled based on a literature review of existing validated scales that measured the dimensions of PCC. Next, the inventory was distributed as a cross-sectional survey to 180 Australian Accredited Practicing Dietitians who worked in primary care. Exploratory factor analysis was performed using principal factor analysis with Promax rotation. Cronbach's alpha (criteria ≥0.80), inter-item correlations and corrected item-total correlations (criteria 0.30-0.70) were computed to evaluate the internal consistency of each scale. RESULTS: Five factors were extracted accounting for 56.9% of the variance. Most variables had strong loadings on only one factor. Factors were labelled as: shared decision-making; holistic and individualised care; patient-dietitian communication; knowing the patient; and caring patient-dietitian relationships. Cronbach's alpha was 0.94 for the total inventory and ranged from 0.73 to 0.91 for the individual factors. Inter-item correlations and corrected item-total correlations mostly fell in the desired range. CONCLUSIONS: The present study offers a preliminary, conceptually grounded dietitian-reported inventory, which is the first instrument developed and tested to measure PCC in dietetic practice. These findings illustrate the underlying factor structure of the inventory and support the reliability of the scales. With further testing, this inventory may provide useful to clinicians and researchers working to better understand and improve dietetic practice.

Measuring positive health: for now, a bridge too far.

OBJECTIVES: Huber et al. introduced a new concept 'positive health', defined as 'the ability to adapt and self-manage in the face of social, physical and emotional challenges' and suggested a conceptual model comprising six domains covering 32 aspects. Our aim was to generate items and pilot test an outcome measurement instrument for measuring 'positive health' in Dutch adult citizens. STUDY DESIGN: A mixed-method study: a literature search, a qualitative study with interviews and a quantitative ranking study for the development phase, to be followed by a content validity study for the validation phase. METHODS: We developed items based on the concept elicitation study of Huber et al. A ranking study with end users, Dutch citizens and members of an Expert Group was performed for item reduction. Content validity of the prefinal questionnaire was evaluated. RESULTS: A prefinal 46-item questionnaire was developed. The results of the content validity study, however, showed major concerns with regard to relevance, comprehensiveness and comprehensibility of the questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Because of major concerns regarding the conceptual model of 'positive health', it was not possible to develop a valid questionnaire to measure 'positive health'. Future research should focus on the refinement of the conceptualization of 'positive health' before an adequate measurement instrument could be developed that can be used for outcome measurement purposes.

Comparable achievement of client-identified, self-rated goals in intervention and no-intervention groups: reevaluating the use of Goal Attainment Scaling as an outcome measure.

Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) is widely used as a measure of client-centered outcomes in clinical interventions. There are few well-controlled studies using GAS, however, and this limits the conclusions that can be drawn about the determinants of goal attainment post-intervention. In collaboration with researchers, 67- community-dwelling older adults used GAS to establish individualised goals for lifestyle change and memory strategy use in a randomised controlled trial of a multidimensional memory program (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02087137). Participants were allocated to an intervention or no-contact control group. Goal attainment was self-rated by participants at baseline, immediate post-intervention, and six-week follow-up. A mixed-model analysis of variance revealed a main effect of time, but no main effect of group and no interaction between time and group. In both the intervention and control groups, respectively, T-scores increased from baseline (Ms = 37 and 37) to post-intervention (Ms = 52 and 50) and were stable at follow-up (Ms = 52 and 51). Results were similar using ordinal data interpretation. Comparable goal attainment in participants receiving intervention versus no intervention underscores the importance of control groups in evaluation studies utilising GAS as an outcome measure, and supports a possible therapeutic contribution of setting and rating goals with GAS.

Fluid Sensing Using Quartz Tuning Forks-Measurement Technology and Applications.

We provide an overview of recent achievements using quartz tuning forks for sensing liquid viscosity and density. The benefits of using quartz crystal tuning forks (QTFs) over other sensors are discussed on the basis of physical arguments and issues arising in real world applications. The path to highly accurate and robust measurement systems is described and a recently devised system considering these findings is presented. The performance of the system is analyzed for applications such as the mixing ratio measurement of fuels, diesel-soot contamination for engine oil condition monitoring, and particle size characterization in suspensions. It is concluded that using properly designed systems enables a variety of applications in industry and research.

[Validation of the German translation of the ASAS health index : A questionnaire to assess functioning and health in patients with spondyloarthritis]. / Validierung der deutschen Version des ASAS-Gesundheitsindex : Ein Fragebogen zur Erfassung von Funktionsfähigkeit und Gesundheit bei Patienten mit Spondyloarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was the validation of the German translation of the ASAS Health Index (ASAS HI), which measures functioning and health in patients with axial and peripheral spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHOD: Patients with SpA who fulfilled the ASAS classification criteria for axial (axSpA) or peripheral SpA (pSpA) were included in this study. Constuct validity of the ASAS HI was tested by using Spearman's correlation coefficients. Reliability was analyzed by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) in patients with stable disease. In patients requiring an important therapeutic change because of unacceptable high disease activity, the sensitivity to change was analyzed using standardized response mean (SRM). RESULTS: A total of 171 patients (57.9% male, age 44.4 ± 13.0 years) were included. The internal consistency was high with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.83. The reliability (n = 63) was good (ICC = 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.96). The sensitivity to change of the ASAS HI was low for a relatively small number of cases (n = 33) with a SRM of -0.27 but showed a good ability to discriminate between various stages of disease activity and physical functioning. DISCUSSION: We showed that the German translation of the ASAS HI provide good psychometric properties to assess functioning and health in patients with SpA. This reliable and sensitive to change questionnaire therefore enables the assessment of disease-specific global functioning and severity in patients with all forms of SpA.

COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures.

PURPOSE: Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ from reviews of interventions and diagnostic test accuracy studies and are complex. In fact, conducting a review of one or more PROMs comprises of multiple reviews (i.e., one review for each measurement property of each PROM). In the absence of guidance specifically designed for reviews on measurement properties, our aim was to develop a guideline for conducting systematic reviews of PROMs. METHODS: Based on literature reviews and expert opinions, and in concordance with existing guidelines, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) steering committee developed a guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. RESULTS: A consecutive ten-step procedure for conducting a systematic review of PROMs is proposed. Steps 1-4 concern preparing and performing the literature search, and selecting relevant studies. Steps 5-8 concern the evaluation of the quality of the eligible studies, the measurement properties, and the interpretability and feasibility aspects. Steps 9 and 10 concern formulating recommendations and reporting the systematic review. CONCLUSIONS: The COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs includes methodology to combine the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties with the quality of the PROM itself (i.e., its measurement properties). This enables reviewers to draw transparent conclusions and making evidence-based recommendations on the quality of PROMs, and supports the evidence-based selection of PROMs for use in research and in clinical practice.

Current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany: a cross-sectional online survey.

BACKGROUND: The use of measurement instruments in physiotherapy has been recommended in clinical practice guidelines to improve evidence-based practice. The aims of the study were (a) to describe the current use of measurement instruments by physiotherapists working in Germany and (b) to investigate the facilitators and barriers to use measurement instruments. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used a nationwide online survey, which was accessible to all physiotherapists working in Germany. RESULTS: In total, 522 adult physiotherapists working in Germany completed the questionnaire. The mean age of the respondents was 38 years, 63% were female, and 53% had >10 years of work experience. Thirty-one percent of the respondents used measurement instruments in ≥80% of their patients, and 26% used measurement instruments in ≤20%. Measurement instruments were used for diagnostic and prognostic purposes by 69% and 22% of respondents, respectively. The three most frequently reported measurement instruments were "goniometer" (n = 254), some kind of a "visual/numeric analogue scale" (n = 139), and the "manual examination of muscle-strength" (n = 54). Seven of the 13 most stated measurement instruments measure activities or participation. The most important facilitator was physiotherapists' positive attitudes towards measurement instruments. Two out of three respondents reported having sufficient knowledge and skills to apply measurement instruments in clinical practice. The most pronounced barriers were insufficient additional financial compensations and requiring extra time to document test scores. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents could imagine using an electronic device for a user-friendly patient health record system in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The limited use of measurement instruments reported by physiotherapists working in Germany appears to be due to organisational issues, in combination with a lack of knowledge and skills needed to apply the measurement instruments, rather than due to individual or managerial reasons. To support the use of measurement instruments, sufficient time resources and adequate financial compensation are required. Educational approaches should focus on imparting patient-centred and patient-reported outcomes to quantify activities and participation. Electronic patient health record systems have potential to facilitate the application of standardised measurement instruments if the barriers identified in this survey are addressed properly.