Checklist to operationalize measurement characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures

Validated patient reported outcome measures in speech-language pathology: A scoping review of adult practice

PURPOSE

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to inform value-based healthcare. Within speech-language pathology (SLP), there is no synthesis of validated PROMs to guide professional practice. This scoping review systematically identifies and evaluates condition-specific PROMs across adult SLP practice.

METHOD

A literature search was performed to identify studies published until 18th February 2022 from MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycInfo, Scopus, Cochrane Collaboration, and Web of Science. Abstracts and full texts were screened in Covidence. Relevant studies that validated PROMs in English were extracted and assessed using the "Checklist to operationalise measurement characteristics of PROMs" by two independent reviewers.

RESULT

Ninety-seven articles provided validation data for 71 PROMS across seven SLP practice areas. These included voice (n = 18), swallowing (n = 14), language (n = 11), fluency (n = 8), speech (n = 4), laryngectomy (n = 3), and cognitive-communication (n = 2). No PROMs were identified for augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) (n = 0). Quality ratings were variable on the Francis et al. checklist.

CONCLUSION

A range of validated PROMs were identified to guide SLP practice in measuring patient perceptions across a range of practice areas in adults. Opportunities for further development in SLP practice areas with limited PROMs, such as speech, cognitive-communication, and AAC are also highlighted.

German translation and psychometric evaluation of the Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS-GER) in a general population sample and in patients with acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

The Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS) is a scale-based measure with 35 items that assesses various aspects of mental health literacy. The original English version was developed in Australia and has been translated into several languages. The present study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the questionnaire for its use in Germany and to determine the psychometric properties of the German version of the MHLS (MHLS-GER) in two different samples.

METHODS

After translation and cultural adaptation, the MHLS-GER was administered via an online survey in a general population sample and via a postal survey in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted to determine the dimensionality. Furthermore, internal consistency, known-groups-validity and measurement invariance were evaluated.

RESULTS

Data of 517 participants of the general population sample and 786 participants of the AMI sample were analyzed. In both samples a four-factor structure yielded good model fit indices. The four subscales of the MHLS-GER including 31 items comprise the topics 'knowledge' (11 items), 'information seeking' (4 items), 'stigmatization' (9 items) and 'social distance' (7 items). All four subscales showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.80 to 0.90, average inter-item correlation: 0.30-0.59) and were mostly invariant across the two samples. Participants with previous experience with mental disorders (personal or professional context) showed higher scores on the four subscales.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to the unidimensional structure of the original version, the MHLS-GER comprises four subscales. All subscales showed acceptable to good psychometric properties and can now be used to assess mental health literacy. Further validation studies to evaluate test-retest-reliability and responsiveness are required.

Screening instruments for mental disorders in primary healthcare: a scoping review protocol (SCREENING-MD)

INTRODUCTION

When mental disorders go undetected until later stages, they can result in poorer health outcomes for patients. Primary healthcare (PHC) stands as a strategic setting for the early identification and management of these mental disorders, given its role as the primary care environment for health service users. This scoping review has the objective of mapping and assessing screening instruments validated for mental disorders that are applicable in PHC, particularly regarding their measurement properties.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This scoping review will include studies that have developed and validated screening instruments for mental disorders in the PHC context, irrespective of the age group. Searches will be conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PsycInfo without imposing restrictions on publication status, publication year or language. Additionally, we will scrutinise the references cited in the selected studies. Our inclusion criteria encompass studies examining any measurement property recommended by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) taxonomy. The selection process, data extraction and quality assessment of studies will be performed independently by pairs of reviewers. To evaluate the risk of bias within the selected studies, we will employ the COSMIN Risk of Bias 2 tools. The collected data will undergo analysis using descriptive statistics and will be presented in an evidence gap map format for each specific mental disorder.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The findings from this review will be discussed through deliberative dialogue with stakeholders and disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. The project was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research at the University of Sorocaba (number: 66993323.9.0000.5500).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Open Science Framework - 10.17605/OSF.IO/Z6T5M.

Research gap in esophageal achalasia: a narrative review

In recent years, new translational evidence, diagnostic techniques, and innovative therapies have shed new light on esophageal achalasia and revamped the attention on this relatively rare motility disorder. This narrative review aims to highlight the most recent progress and the areas where further research is needed. The four senior authors identified five topics commonly discussed in achalasia management: i.e. pathogenesis, role of functional lumen imaging probe in the diagnostic flow chart of achalasia, how to define the outcome of achalasia treatments, how to manage persistent chest pain after the treatment, and if achalasia patients' may benefit from a regular follow-up. We searched the bibliographic databases to identify systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized control trials, and original research articles in English up to December 2023. We provide a summary with the most recent findings in each of the five topics and the critical points where to address future research, such as the immune-genetic patterns of achalasia that might explain the transition among the different phenotypes, the need for a validated clinical definition of treatment success, the use of neuromodulators to manage chest pain, and the need for identifying achalasia patients at risk for cancer and who may benefit of long-term follow-up. Although undoubtedly, progress has been made on the definition and management of achalasia, unmet needs remain. Debated aspects range from mechanistic insights, symptoms, objective measure relationships, and accurate clinical responses to therapeutic interventions. Translational research is eagerly awaited to answer these unresolved questions.

The Sensory Processing Measure - Second Edition: A Critical Review and Appraisal

This paper aims to provide an overview and critique of the newly updated Sensory Processing Measure - second edition (SPM-2) to assist clinicians in understanding its strengths and limitations and in selecting an appropriate sensory processing scale that best meets their clients' needs. Using four established research methodological quality critique tools, the SPM-2's family of age-related versions was evaluated by administering the tools separately and discussed their scoring and findings to reach a consensus on all ratings. The tools identified several strengths and weaknesses of the SPM-2. The SPM-2's items on its age-related versions scored well in the criteria of internal consistency, test-retest reliability, explanation of the instrument design, construct validity, content validity, criterion validity and ease of administration, and scoring. However, a lack of normative data for participant groups outside of the United States, methodological limitations, and a lack of investigation into some important psychometric properties, particularly responsiveness, were identified as notable weaknesses of the SPM-2's items on its age-related versions based on the critique criteria. Overall, despite the areas needing further development and investigation, the SPM-2 is considered a psychometrically sound tool that provides a reliable and valid approach to measuring aspects of the sensory processing construct across the lifespan.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Routine Clinical Practice: Practical Guidance for Institutional Review Boards

The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is increasingly common in routine clinical practice. As tools to quantify symptoms and health status, PROMs play an important role in focusing health care on outcomes that matter to patients. The uses of PROM data are myriad, ranging from clinical care to survey-based research and quality improvement. Discerning the boundaries between these use cases can be challenging for institutional review boards (IRBs). In this article, we provide a framework for classifying the three primary PROM use cases (clinical care, human subjects research, and quality improvement) and discuss the level of IRB oversight (if any) necessary for each. One of the most important considerations for IRB staff is whether PROMs are being used primarily for clinical care and thus do not constitute human subjects research. We discuss characteristics of PROMs implemented primarily for clinical care, focusing on: data platform; survey location; questionnaire length; patient interface; and clinician interface. We also discuss IRB oversight of projects involving the secondary use of PROM data that were collected during the course of clinical care, which span human subjects research and quality improvement. This framework provides practical guidance for IRB staff as well as clinicians who use PROMs as communication aids in routine clinical practice.

Reliability of a Smartphone App to Objectively Monitor Performance Outcomes in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Developing new clinical measures for degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is an AO Spine RECODE-DCM Research, an international and multi-stakeholder partnership, priority. Difficulties in detecting DCM and its changes cause diagnostic and treatment delays in clinical settings and heightened costs in clinical trials due to elevated recruitment targets. Digital outcome measures can tackle these challenges due to their ability to measure disease remotely, repeatedly, and more economically.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the reliability of the MoveMed battery of performance outcome measures.

METHODS

A prospective observational study in decentralized secondary care was performed in England, United Kingdom. The primary outcome was to determine the test-retest reliability of the MoveMed performance outcomes using the intraclass correlation (ICC) of agreement . The secondary outcome was to determine the measurement error of the MoveMed performance outcomes using both the SE of the mean (SEM) of agreement and the smallest detectable change (SDC) of agreement . Criteria from the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) manual were used to determine adequate reliability (ie, ICC of agreement ≥0.7) and risk of bias. Disease stability was controlled using 2 minimum clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds obtained from the literature on the patient-derived modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (p-mJOA) score, namely, MCID ≤1 point and MCID ≤2 points.

RESULTS

In total, 7 adults aged 59.5 (SD 12.4) years who live with DCM and possess an approved smartphone participated in the study. All tests demonstrated moderate to excellent test-retest coefficients and low measurement errors. In the MCID ≤1 group, ICC of agreement values were 0.84-0.94 in the fast tap test, 0.89-0.95 in the hold test, 0.95 in the typing test, and 0.98 in the stand and walk test. SEM of agreement values were ±1 tap, ±1%-3% stability score points, ±0.06 keys per second, and ±10 steps per minute, respectively. SDC of agreement values were ±3 taps, ±4%-7% stability score points, ±0.2 keys per second, and ±27 steps per minute, respectively. In the MCID ≤2 group, ICC of agreement values were 0.61-0.91, 0.75-0.77, 0.98, and 0.62, respectively; SEM of agreement values were ±1 tap, ±2%-4% stability score points, ±0.06 keys per second, and ±10 steps per minute, respectively; and SDC of agreement values were ±3-7 taps, ±7%-10% stability score points, ±0.2 keys per second, and ±27 steps per minute, respectively. Furthermore, the fast tap, hold, and typing tests obtained sufficient ratings (ICC of agreement ≥0.7) in both MCID ≤1 and MCID ≤2 groups. No risk of bias factors from the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The criteria from COSMIN provide "very good" quality evidence of the reliability of the MoveMed tests in an adult population living with DCM.

The Voice Problem Impact Scales (VPIS)

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for systematically assessing a person's perspectives and experiences with disease to inform clinical decision-making. However, PROMs can occasionally fail to capture subtle differences amongst subgroups. In response to this problem, the aim of the current study was to examine the convergent validity of four patient-reported voice activity and participation scales to better reflect and describe the impact of a voice problem in a patient's work, home, social and overall life. It was hypothesized that augmenting the validated PROM with a directed situational short instrument may enhance patient and clinician communication. This would allow for further description of individual areas of activity limitations or participation restrictions that are relevant to the patient, potentially informing therapeutic goals.

METHODS

The Voice Problem Impact Scales (VPIS) were developed following the criteria outlined by Francis et al (2016). A retrospective chart review was completed for voice therapy treatment seeking patients at the USC Voice Center. Results from the Voice Handicap Index-10 (VHI-10) and VPIS scores were recorded at the time of the evaluation. Consensus Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Voice (CAPE-V) assessment was performed by an SLP with fellowship training in voice.

RESULTS

Three hundred four charts were reviewed, and 198 met inclusion criteria. When considering all patients, VHI-10 scores were significantly correlated with each domain of the VPIS, including overall (R = 0.635, P < 0.001), work (R = 0.436, P < 0.001), social (R = 0.714, P < 0.001), and home (R = 0.637, P < 0.001). For females aged 18-39 and aged ≥60, the VHI-10 was correlated with all domains except work. CAPE-V score was significantly correlated with the social domain (R = 0.236, P = 0.001). Using the corrected significance level, it was not correlated with the overall (R = 0.165, P = 0.022), home (R = 0.197, P = 0.006), or work domains (R = 0.042, P = 0.567). The VHI-10 was not correlated with any of the VPIS domains for males aged 18-39, was correlated with all domains for males aged 40-59, and was correlated with all domains except work for males aged ≥60. Age was the only significant predictor of the work domain (β = -4.631 P < 0.001), with a model fit of R2 = 0.101.

CONCLUSIONS

Scores from each domain of the VPIS are significantly correlated with VHI-10 scores thus confirming the instrument's convergent validity. There are certain groups for which currently used questionnaires may underrepresent the impact of dysphonia on the patient's life. The VPIS represents a broad tool that might allow the patient to interpret each scale within their individual context and cultural background. The VPIS emphasizes the significance of the dysphonia on quality of life in four common environments. Using this instrument can augment questionnaires and initiate conversations between the provider and patient to determine the area(s) where voice impairment is most important enhancing shared decision-making on therapeutic goals for plan of care.

Recommendations to address respondent burden associated with patient-reported outcome assessment

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used in healthcare research to provide evidence of the benefits and risks of interventions from the patient perspective and to inform regulatory decisions and health policy. The use of PROs in clinical practice can facilitate symptom monitoring, tailor care to individual needs, aid clinical decision-making and inform value-based healthcare initiatives. Despite their benefits, there are concerns that the potential burden on respondents may reduce their willingness to complete PROs, with potential impact on the completeness and quality of the data for decision-making. We therefore conducted an initial literature review to generate a list of candidate recommendations aimed at reducing respondent burden. This was followed by a two-stage Delphi survey by an international multi-stakeholder group. A consensus meeting was held to finalize the recommendations. The final consensus statement includes 19 recommendations to address PRO respondent burden in healthcare research and clinical practice. If implemented, these recommendations may reduce PRO respondent burden.

Validation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) physical function questionnaire in late-onset Pompe disease using PROPEL phase 3 data

BACKGROUND

The construct validity and interpretation of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Physical Function short form 20a (PF20a) questionnaire were evaluated for patients with late-onset Pompe disease (LOPD), a rare, autosomal recessive, progressive neuromuscular disorder treatable by enzyme replacement therapy (ERT).

METHODS

In the phase 3 PROPEL study, adults with LOPD underwent testing of physical functioning and had PRO measurements at baseline and at weeks 12, 26, 38, and 52 while receiving experimental or standard-of-care ERT. All patients were pooled for analyses, without comparisons between treatment groups. Associations and correlations between PROMIS PF20a scores and the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), % predicted forced vital capacity (FVC), manual muscle test (MMT) of the lower extremities, Gait, Stairs, Gowers' maneuver, Chair (GSGC) score, and Rasch-built Pompe-specific Activity (R-PAct) scale were evaluated by calculating regression coefficients in linear regression models and Pearson correlation coefficients (R); patients' age, sex, race, ERT prior to study, body mass index, and study treatment were included as covariables. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of PROMIS PF20a was determined using distribution- and anchor-based methods.

RESULTS

123 patients received at least 1 dose of ERT. In multivariable analyses, PROMIS PF20a scores had strong correlations with R-PAct scores (R = 0.83 at baseline and R = 0.67 when evaluating changes between baseline and 52 weeks) and moderate correlations with the 6MWD (R = 0.57 at baseline and R = 0.48 when evaluating changes between baseline and 52 weeks). Moderate correlations were also observed between PROMIS PF20a and MMT (R = 0.54), GSGC (R=-0.51), and FVC (R = 0.48) at baseline. In multivariable linear regression models, associations were significant between PROMIS PF20a and 6MWD (P = 0.0006), MMT (P = 0.0034), GSGC (P = 0.0278), and R-PAct (P < 0.0001) at baseline, between PROMIS PF20a and 6MWD (P < 0.0001), FVC (P = 0.0490), and R-PAct (P < 0.0001) when combining all measurements, and between PF20a and 6MWD (P = 0.0016) and R-PAct (P = 0.0001) when evaluating changes in scores between baseline and 52 weeks. The anchor-based and distribution-based MCID for a clinically important improvement for PROMIS PF20a were 2.4 and 4.2, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

PROMIS PF20a has validity as an instrument both to measure and to longitudinally follow physical function in patients with LOPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03729362. Registered 2 November 2018, https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/search?term=NCT03729362 .

Health literacy in patients with pulmonary embolism: development and validation of the HeLP (Health Literacy in Pulmonary Embolism)-Questionnaire

Background

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common cardiovascular disease and health literacy is necessary to deal with its consequences after the acute event. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a new questionnaire to measure PE-specific health literacy.

Methods

A mixed-methods design with qualitative and quantitative elements was used in the development process. A literature review about health literacy concepts and instruments and interviews with patients with PE and clinicians were conducted. Quantitative analyses included factor analyses, item response theory with a graded partial credit model, and reliability analyses in different test and validation samples. Furthermore, convergent and known-groups validity and responsiveness were assessed.

Results

The qualitative results supported a concept of PE-related health literacy with four main topics: dealing with PE-related health information, disease management, health-related selfcare, and social support. An initial item pool of 91 items was developed. Further interviews and an online survey with patients with PE (n = 1,013) were used to reduce the number of items and to confirm structural validity. Confirmatory factor analyses in the final evaluation study with patients with PE (n = 238) indicated a good model fit of the four-factor structure. The Health Literacy in Pulmonary Embolism (HeLP)-Questionnaire showed good reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.82 to 0.90). All four subscales were responsive toward receiving a brochure with PE-related health information.

Conclusion

The newly developed German HeLP Questionnaire comprises 23 items in four domains and showed good psychometric properties. Further evaluation of the questionnaire in different samples of patients with PE is needed.

Assessment of structural and cross-cultural validity of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire: a scoping review

Introduction

The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that has been translated and cross-culturally adapted to at least 50 languages. Since the measure was developed in 1996, many researchers have reported on the construct validity (including structural and cross-cultural validity) of this instrument following translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The aim of this scoping review was to identify the methods used for the psychometric evaluation of structural and cross-cultural validity of the DASH questionnaire.

Methods

The updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews and the PRISMA Extension for scoping reviews checklist was utilised. EBSCOHost (Academic Search Premier, Africa Wide, CINAHL, E-Journals and Medline), PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for articles (published between 1996-2022) and considered against the eligibility criteria.

Results

The scoping review collated evidence across 50 articles (37 language versions) of the evaluation of structural and cross-cultural validity of the DASH questionnaire. Three articles conducted confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to assess structural validity, and none performed Multiple Group Confirmatory Factor Analysis (MGCFA) to assess cross-cultural validity.

Conclusion

The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) taxonomy propose that structural validity is best evaluated through CFA, with prior evidence of dimensionality. Additionally, cross-cultural validity (measurement invariance) is to be evaluated through MGCFA. This review identified that CFA is utilised infrequently and that to date cross-cultural validity has not been appropriately assessed for translations of the DASH questionnaire.

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) for body image in dermatology: A systematic review

Introduction

It is widely acknowledged that negative body image perception is linked to anxiety, depression, and body dysmorphic disorder. However, there is no gold standard, body image related patient reported outcome measure in use, specific for dermatologic disease, despite evidence to suggest a high prevalence of mental health problems relating to body image in this group of patients.

Aim

The aim of this study was to perform a review of body image Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) used in dermatology and to evaluate their effectiveness.

Methods

Searches were performed in the major databases. Two investigators independently performed full text evaluation by applying an established checklist to evaluate the conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretability and respondent burden.

Results

Six different PROMs were identified of which only one was fully validated. There was a significant lack of patient involvement in the development of PROMs in this context.

Conclusions

We therefore encourage further research in this field to improve the quality of evidence to better understand the relationship between mental health and dermatologic disease.

A systematic review and psychometric evaluation of resilience measurement scales for people living with dementia and their carers

Psychometrically sound resilience outcome measures are essential to establish how health and care services or interventions can enhance the resilience of people living with dementia (PLWD) and their carers. This paper systematically reviews the literature to identify studies that administered a resilience measurement scale with PLWD and/or their carers and examines the psychometric properties of these measures. Electronic abstract databases and the internet were searched, and an international network contacted to identify peer-reviewed journal articles. Two authors independently extracted data. They critically reviewed the measurement properties from the available psychometric data in the studies, using a standardised checklist adapted for purpose. Fifty-one studies were included in the final review, which applied nine different resilience measures, eight developed in other populations and one developed for dementia carers in Thailand. None of the measures were developed for use with people living with dementia. The majority of studies (N = 47) focussed on dementia carers, three studies focussed on people living with dementia and one study measured both carers and the person with dementia. All the studies had missing information regarding the psychometric properties of the measures as applied in these two populations. Nineteen studies presented internal consistency data, suggesting seven of the nine measures demonstrate acceptable reliability in these new populations. There was some evidence of construct validity, and twenty-eight studies hypothesised effects a priori (associations with other outcome measure/demographic data/differences in scores between relevant groups) which were partially supported. The other studies were either exploratory or did not specify hypotheses. This limited evidence does not necessarily mean the resilience measure is not suitable, and we encourage future users of resilience measures in these populations to report information to advance knowledge and inform further reviews. All the measures require further psychometric evaluation in both these populations. The conceptual adequacy of the measures as applied in these new populations was questionable. Further research to understand the experience of resilience for people living with dementia and carers could establish the extent current measures -which tend to measure personal strengths -are relevant and comprehensive, or whether further work is required to establish a new resilience outcome measure.

Instruments to Measure Patient Satisfaction with Comprehensive Medication Management Services: A Scoping Review Protocol

Comprehensive medication management (CMM) is the service offered within the clinical practice of pharmaceutical care, which has the objective to optimize pharmacotherapeutic outcomes. Patient satisfaction is a multidimensional construct that points to the quality of the health services offered and the degree to which the patients' expectations and needs are met. The evaluation of the level of patient satisfaction is a key indicator to support decisions and to improve the quality of the service provided. This study aims to describe the protocol for a scoping review to map the instruments to measure patient satisfaction with CMM services and compare them according to their development characteristics and the applicability of patient-reported outcome measures. The literature search will be conducted using the scoping review methodology, proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute and the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) method. The results will be presented in two sessions: (1) description of the search strategy; and (2) the characteristics of the satisfaction instruments, number of items and questions related to the conceptual model, content validity, construct validity, reliability, score/interpretation, and respondent burden. This review will shed light on the available satisfaction measurement instruments, allowing existing gaps to be identified for future research.

Key considerations to reduce or address respondent burden in patient-reported outcome (PRO) data collection

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used in clinical trials to provide evidence of the benefits and risks of interventions from a patient perspective and to inform regulatory decisions and health policy. The collection of PROs in routine practice can facilitate monitoring of patient symptoms; identification of unmet needs; prioritisation and/or tailoring of treatment to the needs of individual patients and inform value-based healthcare initiatives. However, respondent burden needs to be carefully considered and addressed to avoid high rates of missing data and poor reporting of PRO results, which may lead to poor quality data for regulatory decision making and/or clinical care.

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. This impedes data aggregation and outcome comparison across studies. This limitation can be reversed by developing a core measurement set (CMS) for 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: the next step of this initiative is to determine 'how' to measure these features. This 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 and the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments. The process involves five phases. In phase 1, the steering committee agreed on the constructs to be measured by sourcing consensus definitions from patients, professionals and the literature. In phases 2 and 3, systematic reviews were conducted to identify tools for each construct and aggregate their evidence. Constructs with and without tools were identified, and scoping reviews were conducted for constructs without tools. Evidence on measurement properties, as well as on timing of assessments, are currently being aggregated. These will be presented in phase 4: a consensus meeting where a multi-disciplinary panel of experts will select the instruments that will form the CMS. Following selection, guidance on the implementation of the CMS will be developed and disseminated (phase 5). A preliminary CMS review scheduled at 4 years from release.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Cambridge (HBREC2019.14). Dissemination strategies will 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.

Needs assessment instruments for family caregivers of cancer patients receiving palliative care: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Family caregivers of palliative cancer patients experience various supportive care needs. Appropriate self-reported instruments with robust psychological properties are required to identify these needs of family caregivers. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to identify self-reported supportive care needs assessment instruments for family caregivers of palliative cancer patients and assess their contents, psychometric properties, and applicability.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted in six English databases and four Chinese databases from inception to October 2020 and updated in June 2021. The instruments identified were evaluated using an 18-item checklist consisting of six domains: conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring and interpretation, and respondent burden and presentation.

RESULTS

Six articles, describing four self-reported needs assessment instruments, were included in the review. These instruments varied significantly in terms of contents, constructs, scoring methods, and applicability. Three of these instruments were developed to assess the comprehensive supportive care needs of family caregivers, while one was specifically developed to assess the spiritual needs of family caregivers. With respect to psychometric properties, none of the instruments identified met all the criteria. Three major shortcomings were identified, namely, lack of longitudinal validity, lack of a strategy for interpreting missing data, and lack of a description of the literacy level required to understand the questions. Additionally, the instrument development processes assessed in this study lacked qualitative elements.

CONCLUSIONS

End-users need to consider contents, psychometric properties, and applicability when choosing an appropriate needs assessment instrument according to individual purpose and context. Further evaluation or development of needs assessment for the family caregivers of palliative cancer patients is needed, with a particular emphasis on caregivers' perspectives.

Saving time and effort: Best practice for adapting existing patient-reported outcome measures in hepatology

It is increasingly recognised that collecting patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) data is an important part of healthcare and should be considered alongside traditional clinical assessments. As part of a more holistic view of healthcare provision, there has been an increased drive to implement PROM collection as part of routine clinical care in hepatology. This drive has resulted in an increase in the number of PROMs currently developed to be used in various liver conditions. However, the development and validation of a new PROM is time-consuming and costly. Therefore, before deciding to develop a new PROM, researchers should consider identifying existing PROMs to assess their appropriateness and, if necessary, make adaptations to existing PROMs to ensure their rigour when used with the target population. Little is written in the literature on how to identify and adapt the existing PROMs in hepatology. This article aims to provide a summary of the current literature and guidance regarding identifying and adapting existing PROMs in clinical practice.

Conducting Systematic Reviews of the Quality and Psychometric Properties of Health-Related Measurement Instruments: Finding the Right Tool for the Job

Many health-related measurement instruments have been developed to measure psychological constructs and whilst several instruments are usually available for a particular study, finding the right tool for the job is important. Systematic reviews of measurement properties of instruments have long been identified as a valuable strategy to ensure that we select the right tool to assess mental health. There are many important steps and procedures to guide these types of systematic reviews to find the "best fit" and this paper summarizes some of these key processes and steps. The selection of instrument(s) to use should be made considering the most recent comprehensive review of the quality of the outcome measurement instrument based on unbiased assessment of its psychometric properties, responsiveness, and generalizability of results. Researchers planning to conduct a systematic review of health-related measurement instruments should design the review beforehand using standardized frameworks. Conducting systematic reviews of the quality and psychometric properties of health-related measurement instruments is important to ensure we choose the best tool for the research question and target population.

Velopharyngeal Inadequacy-Related Quality of Life Assessment: The Instrument Development and Application Review

Objective

For the patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures related to patients with velopharyngeal inadequacy (VPI), different quality of life (QOL) instruments have been developed. The present systematic review was designated to identify current VPI-related QOL instrument development, validation, and applicability.

Methods

Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases were searched in January 2022. “Velopharyngeal” or “palatopharyngeal” and “quality of life” or “life quality” were searched in title, abstract, and keywords. This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of the identified literature. An established checklist was used to evaluate the measurement properties of each identified instrument.

Results

A total of 375 articles and 13 instruments were identified, which can be divided into nine types of families according to their development procedures. Developmental and measurement characteristics, evidence of conceptual model, content validity, reliability, construct validity, scoring, interpretation, respondent burden, and presentation for all instruments were shown.

Conclusion

The patient's self-report assessment and parent-proxy assessment are both valuable. The conclusion that any QOL instrument is absolutely the best for patients with velopharyngeal inadequacy could not be drawn. Understanding the development and characteristics of different QOL instruments, including their reliability, validity, aim, target, language, and resource, should be important before application in clinic or research.

Capturing the patient experience in systemic lupus erythematosus: Are widely used measures fit-for-purpose and adherent to FDA PRO guidance recommendations?

Background

The 2009 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) patient-reported outcome (PRO) guidance outlines characteristics of rigorous PRO-measure development. There are a number of widely used PRO measures for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), but it is unknown how well the development processes of SLE PRO measures align with FDA guidance; including updated versions. The objective of this study was to assess how well the LupusQoL and LupusPRO, and corresponding updated versions, LupusQoL-US and LupusPROv1.8, align with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2009 patient-reported outcome (PRO) guidance.

Methods

LupusQoL and LupusPRO were selected as the most widely studied and used Lupus PROs in the UK and US. Original (LupusQoL (2007) and LupusQoL-US (2010)) and revised (LupusPROVv1.7 (2012) and LupusPROv1.8 (2018)) versions were reviewed. We used FDA PRO guidance to create evaluation criteria for key components: target population, concepts measured, measurement properties, documentation across the phases of content validity (item-generation and cognitive interviewing, separately) and other psychometric-property testing. Two reviewers abstracted data independently, compared results, and resolved discrepancies.

Results

For all measures, the target population was unclear as population characteristics (e.g., ethnicity, education, disease severity) varied, and/or were not consistently reported or not considered across the three phases (e.g., LupusQoL item-generation lacked male involvement, LupusPRO cognitive-interviewing population characteristics were not reported). The item-generation phase for both original measures was conducted with concepts elicited via patient-engagement interviews and item derivation from experts. Cognitive interviewing was conducted via patient feedback with limited item-tracking for original measures. In contrast, the revised measures assumed content validity. Other psychometric testing recommendations (reliability, construct validity, ability to detect change) were reported for both original and revised measures, except for ability to detect change for revised measures.

Conclusions

The SLE PRO measures adhere to some but not all FDA PRO guidance recommendations. Limitations in processes and documentation of the study population, make it unclear for which target population(s) the current Lupus measures are fit-for-purpose.

Clinical outcome measures and their evidence base in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review to inform a core measurement set (AO Spine RECODE-DCM)

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the measurement properties of outcome measures currently used in the assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) for clinical research.

DESIGN

Systematic review DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through 4 August 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Primary clinical research published in English and whose primary purpose was to evaluate the measurement properties or clinically important differences of instruments used in DCM.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Psychometric properties and clinically important differences were both extracted from each study, assessed for risk of bias and presented in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine outcome instruments were identified from 52 studies published between 1999 and 2020. They measured neuromuscular function (16 instruments), life impact (five instruments), pain (five instruments) and radiological scoring (five instruments). No instrument had evaluations for all 10 measurement properties and <50% had assessments for all three domains (ie, reliability, validity and responsiveness). There was a paucity of high-quality evidence. Notably, there were no studies that reported on structural validity and no high-quality evidence that discussed content validity. In this context, we identified nine instruments that are interpretable by clinicians: the arm and neck pain scores; the 12-item and 36-item short form health surveys; the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, modified JOA and JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire; the neck disability index; and the visual analogue scale for pain. These include six scores with barriers to application and one score with insufficient criterion and construct validity.

CONCLUSIONS

This review aggregates studies evaluating outcome measures used to assess patients with DCM. Overall, there is a need for a set of agreed tools to measure outcomes in DCM. These findings will be used to inform the development of a core measurement set as part of AO Spine RECODE-DCM.

Modifying the quality-adjusted life year calculation to account for meaningful change in health-related quality of life: insights from a pragmatic clinical trial

BACKGROUND

We propose a modified quality-adjusted life year (QALY) calculation that aims to be consistent with guidance for interpreting change in patient-reported outcomes. This calculation incorporates the minimally important difference (MID) in generic preference-based health-related quality of life (HRQL) change scores to reflect what might be considered meaningful HRQL improvement/deterioration. In doing so, we review common issues in QALY calculations such as adjustment for baseline scores and standardizing for between-group differences.

METHODS

Using EQ-5D-5L outcome data from the Alberta TEAMCare-Primary Care Network trial in the management of depression for patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 98), this study compared results from different QALY calculation methods to investigate the impact of (i) adjusting for baseline HRQL score, (ii) standardizing between-group differences at baseline, and (iii) adjusting for 'meaningful' HRQL changes. The following QALY calculation methods are examined: area under curve (QALY-AUC), change from baseline (QALY-CFB), regression modelling (QALY-R), and incorporating an MID for HRQL changes from baseline (QALY-MID).

RESULTS

The incremental QALY-AUC estimate favoured the Collaborative Care group (0.031) while the incremental QALY-CFB (-0.028) estimate favoured Enhanced Care. Adjusting for meaningful HRQL changes resulted in a crude incremental QALY-MID of -0.023; however, after adjusting for between-group differences at baseline, QALY-R and adjusted incremental QALY-MID estimates were -0.007 and -0.001, respectively. In addition, recursive regression analyses showed that very low baseline HRQL scores impact incremental QALY estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Uncertainty in incremental QALY estimates reflects uncertainty in the value of small within-individual change as well as the impact of small differences between groups at baseline. Applying a responder-definition approach yielded crude and adjusted QALY-MID estimates that were more in favour of Collaborative Care than QALY-CFB and QALY-R estimates, respectively, suggesting that ambiguous small changes in HRQL scores have the potential to influence QALY outcomes used in economic or non-economic applications.

Beyond the Eckardt Score: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures in Esophageal Disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and summarize their role in assessing undifferentiated dysphagia and common esophageal disorders, including achalasia, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

RECENT FINDINGS

Given the subjective nature of swallowing disorders, accurate diagnoses often rely on capturing the patient experience. As a result, the number of PROMs used to characterize esophageal symptoms is increasing with a recent particular emphasis on EoE. Overall, esophageal-focused PROMs are used to interpret patient symptoms and quality of life, diagnosis, and symptom changes over time. There are limitations with each instrument, including factors affecting validity, reliability, accessibility, patient participation, and logistical implementation. PROM instruments can be helpful tools in the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal disorders. Instruments should be chosen based on factors such as target population and setting, including research, clinical, and quality improvement efforts. Future research should address how best to implement PROMs and integrate the obtained data with patient care.

Small differences in EQ-5D-5L health utility scores were interpreted differently between and within respondents

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine how population-based health-utility score (HUS) differences reflect individuals' health preferences using responses from the Canadian EQ-5D-5L Valuation Study, including time trade-off (TTO) and discrete-choice experiment (DCE) tasks (n=1073).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Cardinal TTO responses were transformed into pairwise comparisons to yield ordinal TTO responses. We investigated how EQ-5D-5L HUS differences differ from participants' stated cardinal preferences, and determined the smallest HUS difference that may be expected to represent participants' ordinal preferences.

RESULTS

HUS differences near 0 have 30.6% (95% confidence interval: 29.1 to 31.9%) probability of representing a tie in individuals' TTO values. Differences in EQ-5D-5L HUS of -0.054 (-0.071 to -0.029) and 0.047 (0.026 to 0.076) maximized the sensitivity and specificity of discriminating transitions to worse/better health states. For small HUS differences of +/-0.03 to +/-0.07, the magnitude of respondents' average TTO difference on the cardinal scale was 0.17 and 0.35 whether ties were included or excluded, respectively. Absolute HUS differences between 0.043 and 0.064 had a 50% probability of representing respondents' ordinal preferences.

CONCLUSION

A HUS needs to be large enough to reflect individuals' stated health preferences, which may lend support to the application of a minimally important difference for decision-making.

Clinimetric Criteria for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are self-rated scales and indices developed to improve the detection of the patients' subjective experience. Given that a considerable number of PROMs are available, it is important to evaluate their validity and usefulness in a specific research or clinical setting. Published guidelines, based on psychometric criteria, do not fit in with the complexity of clinical challenges, because of their quest for homogeneity of components and inadequate attention to sensitivity. Psychometric theory has stifled the field and led to the routine use of scales widely accepted yet with a history of poor performance. Clinimetrics, the science of clinical measurements, may provide a more suitable conceptual and methodological framework. The aims of this paper are to outline the major limitations of the psychometric model and to provide criteria for clinimetric patient-reported outcome measures (CLIPROMs). The characteristics related to reliability, sensitivity, validity, and clinical utility of instruments are critically reviewed, with particular reference to the differences between clinimetric and psychometric approaches. Of note is the fact that PROMs, rating scales, and indices developed according to psychometric criteria may display relevant clinimetric properties. The present paper underpins the importance of the clini-metric methodology in choosing the appropriate PROMs. CLIPROM criteria may also guide the development of new indices and the validation of existing PROMs to be employed in clinical settings.

Patient-Reported Questionnaires in Multiple Sclerosis Rehabilitation: Responsiveness and Minimal Important Difference of the French Version of the Multiple Sclerosis Questionnaire for Physiotherapists

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness and minimal important difference (MID) of the French version of the Multiple Sclerosis Questionnaire for Physiotherapists (MSQPT). Method: A distribution-based approach was used. Patients (32) were recruited from inpatient and outpatient settings; they completed both the MSQPT and the Hamburg Quality of Life Questionnaire in Multiple Sclerosis (HAQUAMS) at baseline and again at 6 months or discharge. Responsiveness was evaluated using effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM), and modified SRM (MSRM), and the relative efficiency between the MSQPT and HAQUAMS was calculated. Distribution-based MID estimates were calculated for 0.33 SD, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change. Results: The main ES ranged from 0.41 (low) to 1.23 (high). The SRM (-0.89 to 2.69) was generally higher than the ES. The main MSRMs were acceptably low (-0.03 to 0.19). Although the MSQPT seemed more efficient than the HAQUAMS in detecting improved activity and participation, it was less efficient at identifying their deterioration. In a comparison of responsiveness and MID between the German and French versions of the MSQPT, the differences between estimates were small. Conclusions: The available evidence indicates that the French MSQPT is a responsive questionnaire with MIDs that are similar to those of the original German version.

Assessment Methods of Usability and Cognitive Workload of Rehabilitative Exoskeletons: A Systematic Review

Robotic exoskeleton technologies are applied in the medical field to help patients with impaired mobility to recover their motor functions. Relevant literature shows that usability and cognitive workload may influence the patients’ likelihood to benefit from the use of rehabilitative exoskeletons. Following the PRISMA method, the present study aimed to systematically review the assessment methods of usability and cognitive workload in the use of exoskeletal devices for motor rehabilitation. The literature search was conducted in the Scopus and Web of Science bibliographical databases, using 16 keywords that were combined into one search query. A final sample of 23 articles was included in the review, from which 18 distinct assessment methods were identified. Of them, 15 aimed to assess usability, whereas 3 aimed to assess cognitive workload in the use of rehabilitative exoskeletons. Some of the identified methods (e.g., SUS, QUEST, SWAT, and NASA-TLX) showed good psychometric properties and were therefore proven to be appropriate to assess usability and cognitive workload while performing exoskeleton-based rehabilitation. The current study may contribute to the development of guidelines and analytical tools for exoskeletons’ usability and exoskeleton-related patients’ cognitive workload in the domain of medical rehabilitation.

The acid test: Proton pump inhibitors in persistent throat symptoms: A systematic review of systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have evolved to become a frequent treatment option for patients with persistent throat symptoms. The evidence for their use in this context is, however, conflicting. This review assesses the quality of the published systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating PPIs in persistent throat symptoms.

METHODS

Following a literature search, systematic review were evaluated using the Reporting of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Outcome measures were analysed using the "checklist to operationalize measurement characteristics of patient-reported outcome measures."

RESULTS

10 systematic reviews were assessed. All but one were at high risk of bias. No review met the PRISMA checklist criteria. No identified PROM met the checklist requirements for validation. Significant methodological concerns include inappropriate selection of studies for inclusion, poor selection of outcome measures, a lack of appropriate bias assessments and inconsistent reporting of reviews.

CONCLUSION

The quality of evidence concerning the role of PPIs in persistent throat symptoms gives serious cause for concern. Collectively, nine studies at high risk of bias have been cited 714 times. Systematic reviews typically attract these high numbers of citations and, if their premises and conclusions do not withstand scrutiny, they are open to widespread misinterpretation, perpetuation of misunderstanding and negative clinical impact.

How to assess patient satisfaction regarding physician interaction: A systematic review

Patient satisfaction is an important health care quality indicator. This is particularly relevant in chronic diseases, such as, many dermatological diseases. The purpose of the current systematic review was to assess the validated tools measuring patient satisfaction with physician interaction. We performed a systematic review search in Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE. The psychometric properties of the instruments and the domains explored were assessed. Overall, 2229 articles were extracted from the literature search. Of these, 146 articles were eligible for inclusion, 55 were included, and 22 scores were selected. A total of 13 instruments reported cross-cultural validation and the EUROPEP score highlighted the most diverse cross-cultural validation involving 11 different countries. All scores were assessed for content validity, construct validity, factor analysis, reliability, and responsiveness to change. The extent of the validation varied between scores with a few assessing practicability. The following domains were explored: listening skills, empathy, caring/compassion, confidentiality, honesty, behavior, competency/technical skills, satisfaction with the information provided, time given, availability, the environment, trust in the physician, ability to comply with the recommendations, and readiness to recommend the physician to other patients. We identified a total of 22 validated instruments. The major gaps in the validation process appear to be the practicability of the scores and the cross-cultural validation. Major domains evaluated by the scores are communication skills that can be improved by specific training. There is a need to improve evaluation of the quality of the patient-physician relationship in dermatology using validated instruments.

Developing an Implementation Strategy for Systematic Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes at an Academic Health Center

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used in research and have the potential to improve clinical care. We sought to develop a strategy for integrating PROMs into routine clinical care at an academic health center. The implementation strategy consisted of three phases. The first, exploratory phase, focused on engaging leadership and conducting an inventory of current efforts to collect PROMs. The inventory revealed 87 patient-reported outcome efforts, 47 of which used validated PROMs (62% for research, 21% for clinical care, 17% for quality). In the second, preparatory phase, we identified three pilot implementation sites chosen with facilitators determined in the exploratory phase. Using data from local needs assessments at the pilot sites, we constructed a timeline for inclusion of PROM efforts across the clinical enterprise. In the third phase, we adapted a technology platform for capturing PROMs using the electronic health record and began implementing this platform at the pilot sites. We found that integrating PROMs into routine clinical practice is highly complex. This complexity necessitates change management at the enterprise level.

The Impact of Feeding on the Parent and Family Scales (Feeding Impact Scales): Development and Psychometric Testing

Background and Purpose:

Families of children with feeding disorder face significant challenges in supporting their child’s feeding, growth, and development. The Feeding Impact Scales were developed to assess how child feeding impacts parent and family.

Methods:

Items were adapted from an existing scale. Parents of children with feeding difficulty completed the online survey. Item response theory (IRT) analyses were used to evaluate and reduce items. Internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and readability were tested.

Results:

IRT analyses (n = 317) identified 12 items for the Parent Impact and 13 items for the Family Impact. Internal reliability for the scales were acceptable. Convergent validity was supported.

Conclusions:

The Feeding Impact Scales have evidence of reliability and validity. They can be utilized in practice and research.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Colon and Rectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in using patient-reported outcome measures to support value-based care in colorectal surgery. To draw valid conclusions regarding patient-reported outcomes data, measures with robust measurement properties are required.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the use and quality of patient-reported outcome measures in colorectal surgery.

DATA SOURCES

Three major databases were searched for studies using patient-reported outcome measures in the context of colorectal surgery.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles that used patient-reported outcome measures as outcome for colorectal surgical intervention in a comparative effectiveness analysis were included. Exclusion criteria included articles older than 11 years, non-English language, age <18 years, fewer than 40 patients, case reports, review articles, and studies without comparison.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

This was a quality assessment using a previously reported checklist of psychometric properties.

RESULTS

From 2007 to 2018, 368 studies were deemed to meet inclusion criteria. These studies used 165 distinct patient-reported outcome measures. Thirty were used 5 or more times and were selected for quality assessment. Overall, the measures were generally high quality, with 21 (70%) scoring ≥14 on an 18-point scale. Notable weaknesses included management of missing data (14%) and description of literacy level (0%).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its use of original articles for quality assessment. Measures were selected for quality analysis based on frequency of use rather than other factors, such as impact of the article or number of patients in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported outcome measures are widely used in colorectal research. There was a wide range of measures available, and many were used only once. The most frequently used measures are generally high quality, but a majority lack details on how to deal with missing data and information on literacy levels. As the use of patient-reported outcome measures to assess colorectal surgical intervention increases, researchers and practitioners need to become more knowledgeable about the measures available and their quality.

Questionnaire validation practice within a theoretical framework: a systematic descriptive literature review of health literacy assessments

OBJECTIVE

Validity refers to the extent to which evidence and theory support the adequacy and appropriateness of inferences based on score interpretations. The health sector is lacking a theoretically-driven framework for the development, testing and use of health assessments. This study used the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing framework of five sources of validity evidence to assess the types of evidence reported for health literacy assessments, and to identify studies that referred to a theoretical validity testing framework.

METHODS

A systematic descriptive literature review investigated methods and results in health literacy assessment development, application and validity testing studies. Electronic searches were conducted in EBSCOhost, Embase, Open Access Theses and Dissertations and ProQuest Dissertations. Data were coded to the Standards' five sources of validity evidence, and for reference to a validity testing framework.

RESULTS

Coding on 46 studies resulted in 195 instances of validity evidence across the five sources. Only nine studies directly or indirectly referenced a validity testing framework. Evidence based on relations to other variables is most frequently reported.

CONCLUSIONS

The health and health equity of individuals and populations are increasingly dependent on decisions based on data collected through health assessments. An evidence-based theoretical framework provides structure and coherence to existing evidence and stipulates where further evidence is required to evaluate the extent to which data are valid for an intended purpose. This review demonstrates the use of the Standards' theoretical validity testing framework to evaluate sources of evidence reported for health literacy assessments. Findings indicate that theoretical validity testing frameworks are rarely used to collate and evaluate evidence in validation practice for health literacy assessments. Use of the Standards' theoretical validity testing framework would improve evaluation of the evidence for inferences derived from health assessment data on which public health and health equity decisions are based.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Evidence-Based Practice in Speech-Language Pathology

Purpose The patient's perspective of their health is a core component of evidence-based practice (EBP) and person-centered care. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), captured with PRO measures (PROMs), are the main way of formally soliciting and measuring the patient's perspective. Currently, however, PROs play a relatively small role in mainstream speech-language pathology practice. The purpose of this article is to raise important questions about how PROs could be applied to EBP in speech-language pathology for individuals with communication disorders and to propose preliminary approaches to address some of these questions. Method Based on a narrative review of the literature, this article introduces relevant terminology and broadly describes PRO applications in other health care fields. The article also raises questions related to PRO-informed clinical practice in speech-language pathology. To address some of these questions, the article explores previous research to provide suggestions for clinical administration, interpretation, and future research. Conclusion More routine measurement of subjective health constructs via PROMs-for example, constructs such as effort, participation, self-efficacy, and psychosocial functioning-may improve EBP. More routine use of PROMs could significantly expand the information that is available to clinicians about individual clients and add to the evidence base for the profession of speech-language pathology. However, careful consideration and more research are needed on how to capture and interpret PROs from individuals with cognitive and language disorders.

The background, psychometric qualities and clinical application of the visual analog mood scales: A review and evaluation

The purpose of this report is to evaluate the published version of the Visual Analog Mood Scales. These scales were published in 1997 and assess eight clinically relevant unipolar dimensions: afraid, confused, sad, angry, energetic, tired, happy, tense. From a search of the literature in PsycINFO, 24 empirical studies (including reliability and validity) were located on the application of the scales. The use of the scales for diagnosis, treatment and experimentation is described and published data on the test-retest reliability and validity of the scales is summarized. The reported test-retest correlations ranged from .43 to .87 and were considered too low for high stakes decisions. From nine studies, the concurrent validity coefficients across the eight scales ranged from a low of .12 to as high as .82. It is concluded that the scales have clinical utility for a quasi-non-verbal or pictorial assessment of mood states but there are limitations in the interpretation of the results. This is due to the shortcomings in the standardization samples as well as concerns for the psychometric quality in terms of validity and reliability.

The validity and clinical utility of the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand questionnaire for hand injuries in developing country contexts: A systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

INTRODUCTION

The Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire has multiple language versions from many countries around the world. In addition there is extensive research evidence of its psychometric properties.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence available on the validity and clinical utility of the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand as a measure of activity and participation in patients with musculoskeletal hand injuries in developing country contexts.

METHODS

We registered the review with international prospective register of systematic reviews prior to conducting a comprehensive literature search and extracting descriptive data. Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality with the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments critical appraisal tool, the checklist to operationalize measurement characteristics of patient-rated outcome measures and the multidimensional model of clinical utility.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies reporting 12 language versions met the eligibility criteria. Two language versions (Persian and Turkish) had an overall rating of good, and one (Thai) had an overall rating of excellent for cross-cultural validity. The remaining 9 language versions had an overall poor rating for cross-cultural validity. Content and construct validity and clinical utility yielded similar results.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS

Poor quality ratings for validity and clinical utility were due to insufficient documentation of results and inadequate psychometric testing. With the increase in migration and globalization, hand therapists are likely to require a range of culturally adapted and translated versions of the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand. Recommendations include rigorous application and reporting of cross-cultural adaptation, appropriate psychometric testing, and testing of clinical utility in routine clinical practice.

Study protocol to develop a patient-reported outcome measuring disability associated with unilateral vocal fold paralysis: a mixed-methods approach with the CoPE collaborative

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are increasingly developed with multisite, representative patient populations so that they can serve as a primary endpoint in clinical trials and longitudinal studies. Creating multisite infrastructure during PRO measure development can facilitate future comparative effectiveness trials. We describe our protocol to simultaneously develop a PRO measure and create a collaborative of tertiary care centres to address the needs of patients with unilateral vocal fold paralysis (UVFP). We describe the stakeholder engagement, information technology and regulatory foundations for PRO measure development and how the process enables plans for multisite trials comparing treatments for this largely iatrogenic condition.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study has three phases: systematic review, measure development and measure validation. Systematic reviews and qualitative interviews (n=75) will inform the development of a conceptual framework. Qualitative interviews with patients with UVFP will characterise the lived experience of the condition. Candidate PRO measure items will be derived verbatim from patient interviews and refined using cognitive interviews and expert input. The PRO measure will be administered to a large, multisite cohort of adult patients with UVFP via the CoPE (vocal Cord Paralysis Experience) Collaborative. We will establish CoPE to facilitate measure development and to create preliminary infrastructure for future trials, including online data capture, stakeholder engagement, and the identification of barriers and facilitators to participation. Classical test theory psychometrics and grounded theory characterise our approach, and validation includes assessment of latent structure, reliability and validity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Our study is approved by the University of Wisconsin Health Sciences Institutional Review Board. Findings from this project will be published in open-access journals and presented at international conferences. Subsequent use of the PRO measure will include comparative effectiveness trials of treatments for UVFP at CoPE Collaborative sites.

Development of Health Pathways to Standardize Cancer Care Pathways Informed by Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinical Practice Guidelines

PURPOSE

High-quality symptom management and supportive care are essential components of comprehensive cancer care. We aimed to describe the development of an evidence-based automated decisional algorithm for patients with cancer that had specific, actionable, clinical, evidence-based recommendations to improve patient care, communication, and management.

METHODS

We reviewed existing literature and clinical practice guidelines to identify priority domains of patient care and potential clinical recommendations. Two multidisciplinary clinical advisory groups used a two-stage consensus decision-making approach to determine domains of care and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and subsequently developed automated algorithms with clear clinical recommendations amendable to intervention in clinical settings.

RESULTS

Algorithms were developed to inform management of patient symptoms, distress, and unmet needs. Three PRO measures were chosen: Distress Thermometer and problem checklist, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, and the Supportive Care Needs Survey-Screening Tool 9. PRO items were mapped to five domains of patient well-being: physical, emotional, practical, social and family, and maintenance of well-being. A total of 15 actionable clinical recommendations tailored to specific issues of concern were established.

CONCLUSION

Using automated algorithms and clinical recommendations provides a platform for streamlining and systematizing the use of PROs to inform risk-stratified guideline-informed care. The series of algorithms, which set out systematized care pathways for the clinical care of patients with cancer, can be used to potentially inform patient-centered care.

Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome questionnaires for patients with musculoskeletal disorders of the shoulder

PURPOSE

To evaluate the psychometric properties of self-administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires which were used in non-surgical homogeneous populations with musculoskeletal shoulder disorders.

METHODS

The included studies were identified using eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of each article was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. The psychometric properties of original versions and translated versions of PROs were also assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty articles were included. Two musculoskeletal shoulder disorders were identified that met the selection criteria: rotator cuff disease and glenohumeral instability. A total of 11 PROs were identified. In general, the methodological quality of the included studies is fair or poor. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) are the most frequently evaluated PROs for patients with rotator cuff disease, and their psychometric properties seem to vary according to what language that they are in. For glenohumeral instability, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score (OISS) are the most frequently evaluated PROs, and their psychometric properties seem to be adequate.

CONCLUSION

Using for rotator cuff disease is advised, for Norwegian users, the SPADI, WORC, Oxford Shoulder Score, and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand. Dutch and Persian users could use the WORC. For Greek speakers, the SPADI is recommended. Turkish users could use the rotator cuff quality-of-life measure. For glenohumeral instability, Dutch and Norwegian speakers could use the WOSI and the OISS. Italian, Japanese, and Turkish users could use the WOSI. For English users, the OISS and the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire are recommended.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Assessing the Content Validity of a New Patient-Reported Measure of Barriers to Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence for Electronic Administration in Routine HIV Care: Proposal for a Web-Based Delphi Study

Background

Adherence to lifesaving antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV infection remains a challenge for many patients. Routine screening for barriers to ART adherence could help make HIV care more patient-centered and prevent virologic rebound or failure. Our team is currently developing a new HIV-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of these barriers for use in Canada and France along with a digital app for its electronic administration. In our previous work, we developed the PROM’s multidimensional conceptual framework and generated 100 English items, which have been translated to French.

Objective

This study aims to use a Web-based Delphi to help validate and select the content of this new HIV-specific PROM, based on the perspective of anglophone and francophone patients and providers in Canada and France. Here, we present the proposal for this Delphi.

Methods

This modified Delphi will involve a diverse panel of patients (n=32) and providers (n=52) recruited especially from the 9 sites of the PROM development study (site locations in Canada: Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver; in France: Paris, Nantes, Clermont-Ferrand, Saint-Martin, Cayenne). Overall, 2 rounds of Web-based questionnaires will be conducted. The threshold for consensus is set at 60% and will determine which items are carried forward to the second round. Per item, 3 aspects will be rated: importance as a barrier to ART adherence, relevance for HIV care, and clarity. In both rounds, space will be available for free text comments. Overall comprehensiveness will be assessed in the second round.

Results

This study has undergone a methodological review by experts in patient-oriented research. It has received approval from a research ethics board of the McGill University Health Centre. It is financially supported, in part, by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research-Quebec Support Unit (M006). As of May 21, 2019, 15 people living with HIV and 25 providers completed the first round of the Delphi (24 from Canada and 16 from France).

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first Delphi to seek consensus on the most relevant and clinically actionable barriers to ART adherence, collecting opinions on an extensive list of barriers. Drawing on a relatively large and diverse panel of HIV patients and providers, it essentially engages key stakeholders in decision making about the PROM’s final content, helping to ensure its utility and adoption.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/12836

A Systematic Review of Critical Thinking Instruments for Use in Dental Education

Critical thinking is widely recognized as an essential competency in dental education, but there is little agreement on how it should be assessed. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the availability of instruments that could be used to measure critical thinking in dental students and to evaluate psychometric evidence to support their use. In January 2017, an electronic search of both the medical and education literature was performed on nine databases. The search included both keyword and Medical Subject Heading terms for critical thinking, higher education/health sciences education, measurement/assessment, and reproducibility of results. The grey literature was included in the search. The search produced 2,977 unique records. From the title and abstract review, 183 articles were selected for further review, which resulted in 36 articles for data extraction. Ten of these studies sought to evaluate psychometric properties of the instruments used and were subjected to quality assessment. Seven assessment instruments were identified. Of these, three instruments that have not been widely used nor tested in health professions students showed evidence of psychometric strength and appeared to have potential for use in dental education. Further research should focus on the three critical thinking instruments with strong psychometric evidence, with the aim of establishing validity and reliability in the context of dental education.