-
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Nov 2014It is critical for gastrointestinal cancer researchers and clinicians to have access to comprehensive, sensitive and simple-to-use symptom measures that allow them to... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
It is critical for gastrointestinal cancer researchers and clinicians to have access to comprehensive, sensitive and simple-to-use symptom measures that allow them to understand and quantify the subjective patient experience. Development and validation of such scales requires training in psychometrics and occasionally uses technical jargon that can be difficult to penetrate. This review evaluates existing measures of gastrointestinal cancer symptoms, provides tool descriptions, and uses predefined, objective quality criteria to rate psychometric quality and facilitate tool choices for researchers and clinicians.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases were systematically reviewed for scales assessing gastrointestinal cancer and gastrointestinal cancer site-specific symptoms. Evaluation criteria were the following: breadth of domain coverage (content validity), high internal consistency (α ≥ .80), sensitivity to change, and extent of validation.
RESULTS
In n = 36 validation studies, 26 gastrointestinal cancer symptom measures were identified. Of these, n = 13 tools met criteria for recommendation, and six in particular showed strong psychometric properties. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal (FACT-C), European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) gastric cancer module (QLQ-STO22), FACT-Hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep), and EORTC oesophagus, oesophago-gastric junction and stomach module (QLQ OG-25) were identified as the most comprehensive and best validated scales for each of the major gastrointestinal cancer sites. The FACT-Colorectal Symptom Index (FCSI-9) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) FACT-Hepatobiliary Symptom Index (FHSI-18) were specifically validated in patients with advanced colorectal and liver cancer and also demonstrated superior psychometric properties.
CONCLUSIONS
Several comprehensive, well-validated scales exist to adequately assess gastrointestinal cancer site-specific symptoms. Specifically, gastrointestinal cancer submodules of the FACT quality of life questionnaire represent adequate tool choices in most instances and overall, were better validated than the respective EORTC tools. Further improvement of existing, highly rated measures is recommended.
Topics: Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Humans; Psychometrics; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 24865875
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-014-2250-z -
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Jan 2015To conduct a systematic review of studies reporting on the development or validation of comorbidity indices using administrative health data and compare their ability to... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review of studies reporting on the development or validation of comorbidity indices using administrative health data and compare their ability to predict outcomes related to comorbidity (ie, construct validity).
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
We conducted a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE and EMBASE, until September 2012. After title and abstract screen, relevant articles were selected for review by two independent investigators. Predictive validity and model fit were measured using c-statistic for dichotomous outcomes and R(2) for continuous outcomes.
RESULTS
Our review includes 76 articles. Two categories of comorbidity indices were identified: those identifying comorbidities based on diagnoses, using International Classification of Disease codes from hospitalization or outpatient data, and based on medications, using pharmacy data. The ability of indices studied to predict morbidity-related outcomes ranged from poor (C statistic ≤ 0.69) to excellent (C statistic >0.80) depending on the specific index, outcome measured, and study population. Diagnosis-based measures, particularly the Elixhauser Index and the Romano adaptation of the Charlson Index, resulted in higher ability to predict mortality outcomes. Medication-based indices, such as the Chronic Disease Score, demonstrated better performance for predicting health care utilization.
CONCLUSION
A number of valid comorbidity indices derived from administrative data are available. Selection of an appropriate index should take into account the type of data available, study population, and specific outcome of interest.
Topics: Comorbidity; Forecasting; Hospital Mortality; Hospitalization; Humans; Medical Records; Reproducibility of Results; Vital Statistics
PubMed: 25441702
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.09.010 -
Infant Behavior & Development May 2023Interactions between newborns and their parents/primary caregivers are characterized by asymmetric and dependent relationships. This systematic review mapped,... (Review)
Review
Interactions between newborns and their parents/primary caregivers are characterized by asymmetric and dependent relationships. This systematic review mapped, identified, and described the psychometric parameters, categories, and items of instruments used to assess mother-newborn interaction. Seven electronic databases were accessed in this study. Furthermore, this research included neonatal interaction studies describing instruments' items, domains, and psychometric properties while excluding studies that focused on maternal interactions and lacked items for assessing newborns. Additionally, studies validated with older infants that did not have a newborn in the sample were used for test validation, which is a criterion used to decrease the risk of bias. Fourteen observational instruments from 1047 identified citations were included that addressed interactions using varying techniques, constructs, and settings. Particularly, we focused on observational settings that assessed interactions with communication-based constructs in the context of proximity or distance as influenced by physical, behavioral, or procedural barriers. These tools are also used to predict risk behaviors in a psychological context, mitigate feeding difficulties, and conduct neurobehavioral assessments of mother-newborn interactions. The elicited imitation was also an observational setting. This study found that the most described properties in the included citations were inter-rater reliability followed by criterion validity. However, only two instruments reported content, construct, and criterion validity, as well as a description of an internal consistency assessment and inter-rater reliability. Finally, the synthesis of the instruments reported in this study can guide clinicians and researchers in selecting the most appropriate one for their own application.
Topics: Infant; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Mothers; Reproducibility of Results; Parents; Psychometrics; Communication
PubMed: 36863246
DOI: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2023.101825 -
Journal of Evaluation in Clinical... Dec 2014The quality of the current literature on external validity varies considerably. An improved checklist with validated items on external validity would aid decision-makers... (Review)
Review
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
The quality of the current literature on external validity varies considerably. An improved checklist with validated items on external validity would aid decision-makers in judging similarities among circumstances when transferring evidence from a study setting to an implementation setting. In this paper, currently available checklists on external validity are identified, assessed and used as a basis for proposing a new improved instrument.
METHOD
A systematic literature review was carried out in Pubmed, Embase and Cinahl on English-language papers without time restrictions. The retrieved checklist items were assessed for (i) the methodology used in primary literature, justifying inclusion of each item; and (ii) the number of times each item appeared in checklists.
RESULTS
Fifteen papers were identified, presenting a total of 21 checklists for external validity, yielding a total of 38 checklist items. Empirical support was considered the most valid methodology for item inclusion. Assessment of methodological justification showed that none of the items were supported empirically. Other kinds of literature justified the inclusion of 22 of the items, and 17 items were included on the basis of consensus. On 36 occasions, the items were presented without methodological justification for inclusion. Assessment of frequency/occurrence showed that items were mentioned in one to at most 17 checklists.
CONCLUSION
This paper provides building blocks for the development of a new checklist for external validity. The next step is provision of empirical evidence for the checklist items to be selected, and finally, development and validation of a checklist on external validity.
Topics: Checklist; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Sensitivity and Specificity; Validation Studies as Topic
PubMed: 24828521
DOI: 10.1111/jep.12166 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023Increasing attention on workplace wellbeing and growth in workplace wellbeing interventions has highlighted the need to measure workers' wellbeing. This systematic...
INTRODUCTION
Increasing attention on workplace wellbeing and growth in workplace wellbeing interventions has highlighted the need to measure workers' wellbeing. This systematic review sought to identify the most valid and reliable published measure/s of wellbeing for workers developed between 2010 to 2020.
METHODS
Electronic databases Health and Psychosocial Instruments, APA PsycInfo, and Scopus were searched. Key search terms included variations of AND . Studies and properties of wellbeing measures were then appraised using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments.
RESULTS
Eighteen articles reported development of new wellbeing instruments and eleven undertook a psychometric validation of an existing wellbeing instrument in a specific country, language, or context. Generation and pilot testing of items for the 18 newly developed instruments were largely rated 'Inadequate'; only two were rated as 'Very Good'. None of the studies reported measurement properties of responsiveness, criterion validity, or content validity. The three instruments with the greatest number of positively rated measurement properties were the Personal Growth and Development Scale, The University of Tokyo Occupational Mental Health well-being 24 scale, and the Employee Well-being scale. However, none of these newly developed worker wellbeing instruments met the criteria for adequate instrument design.
DISCUSSION
This review provides researchers and clinicians a synthesis of information to help inform appropriate instrument selection in measurement of workers' wellbeing.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=79044, identifier: PROSPERO, CRD42018079044.
Topics: Humans; Mental Health; Health Personnel; Language; Workplace; Working Conditions
PubMed: 37293618
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1053179 -
Translational Journal of the American... 2022There are research-grade devices that have been validated to measure either heart rate (HR) by electrocardiography (ECG) with a Polar chest strap, or step count with...
CONTEXT
There are research-grade devices that have been validated to measure either heart rate (HR) by electrocardiography (ECG) with a Polar chest strap, or step count with ACTiGraph accelerometer. However, wearable activity trackers that measure HR and steps concurrently have been tested against research-grade accelerometers and HR monitors with conflicting results. This review examines validation studies of the Fitbit Charge 2 (FBC2) for accuracy in measuring HR and step count and evaluates the device's reliability for use by researchers and clinicians.
DESIGN
This registered review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The robvis (risk-of-bias visualization) tool was used to assess the strength of each considered article.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Eligible articles published between 2018 and 2019 were identified using PubMed, CINHAL, Embase, Cochran, and World of Science databases and hand-searches. All articles were HR and/or step count validation studies for the FBC2 in adult ambulatory populations.
STUDY SELECTION
Eight articles were examined in accordance with the eligibility criteria alignment and agreement among the authors and research librarian.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were used to measure agreement between the tracker and criterion devices. Mean absolute percent error (MAPE) was used to average the individual absolute percent errors.
RESULTS
Studies that measured CCC found agreement between the FBC2 and criterion devices ranged between 26% and 92% for HR monitoring, decreasing in accuracy as exercise intensity increased. Inversely, CCC increased from 38% to 99% for step count when exercise intensity increased. HR error between MAPE was 9.21% to 68% and showed more error as exercise intensity increased. Step measurement error MAPE was 12% for healthy persons aged 24-72 years but was reported at 46% in an older population with heart failure.
CONCLUSIONS
Relative agreement with criterion and low-to-moderate MAPE were consistent in most studies reviewed and support validation of the FBC2 to accurately measure HR at low or moderate exercise intensities. However, more investigation controlling testing and measurement congruency is needed to validate step capabilities. The literature supports the validity of the FBC2 to accurately monitor HR, but for step count is inconclusive so the device may not be suitable for recommended use in all populations.
PubMed: 36711436
DOI: 10.1249/tjx.0000000000000215 -
Oral Diseases Jul 2021Radiotherapy-induced xerostomia (RIX) is one of the most common adverse effects of radiotherapy to the head and neck, and a major determinant of survivors' quality of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Radiotherapy-induced xerostomia (RIX) is one of the most common adverse effects of radiotherapy to the head and neck, and a major determinant of survivors' quality of life. A number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used in clinical trials of therapeutic interventions for RIX; however, little is known regarding their measurement properties and methodological quality.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature search in Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO for articles published up to May 2019 and evaluating at least one measurement property of PROMs relevant to RIX. The COSMIN guidelines were used to assess relevant measurement properties and methodological quality.
RESULTS
Nine validations studies were identified reporting on four PROMs relevant to RIX. The Xerostomia Questionnaire (XQ) showed overall high-quality evidence for structural validity and internal consistency, but low-quality evidence supporting reliability. The methodological quality of the Groningen Radiotherapy-Induced Xerostomia scale (GRIX), Xerostomia Inventory (XI) and the Xerostomia Quality of Life Scale (XeQoLS) was relatively low for all measurement properties.
CONCLUSIONS
The XQ was found to have the highest potential to capture changes in RIX according to COSMIN guidelines. Additional validation studies are required to further understand the methodological quality of the XI, GRIX and XeQoLS.
Topics: Humans; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires; Xerostomia
PubMed: 32418292
DOI: 10.1111/odi.13416 -
Neurosurgical Review May 2023With the increasing complexity and decreasing exposure to intracranial aneurysm surgery, training and maintenance of the surgical skills have become challenging. This... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
With the increasing complexity and decreasing exposure to intracranial aneurysm surgery, training and maintenance of the surgical skills have become challenging. This review elaborated on simulation training for intracranial aneurysm clipping.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines to identify studies on aneurysm clipping training using models and simulators. The primary outcome was the identification of the predominant modes of the simulation process, models, and training methods associated with a microsurgical learning curve. The secondary outcomes included assessments of the validation of such simulators and the learning capability from the use of such simulators.
RESULTS
Of the 2068 articles screened, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. The chosen reports used a wide range of simulation approaches including ex vivo methods (n = 6); virtual reality (VR) platforms (n = 11); and static (n = 6) and dynamic (n = 3) 3D-printed aneurysm models (n = 6). The ex vivo training methods have limited availability, VR simulators lack haptics and tactility, while 3D static models lack important microanatomical components and the simulation of blood flow. 3D dynamic models including pulsatile flow are reusable and cost-effective but miss microanatomical components.
CONCLUSIONS
The existing training methods are heterogenous and do not realistically simulate the complete microsurgical workflow. The current simulations lack certain anatomical features and crucial surgical steps. Future research should focus on developing and validating a reusable, cost-effective training platform. No systematic validation method exists for the different training models, so there is a need to build homogenous assessment tools and validate the role of simulation in education and patient safety.
Topics: Humans; Neurosurgical Procedures; Intracranial Aneurysm; Virtual Reality; Computer Simulation; Simulation Training; Clinical Competence
PubMed: 37131015
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-023-01995-5 -
Community Dentistry and Oral... Oct 2022To identify the existing OHRQoL instruments for adults, describe their scope (generic or specific), theoretical background, validation type and cross-cultural adaptation. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To identify the existing OHRQoL instruments for adults, describe their scope (generic or specific), theoretical background, validation type and cross-cultural adaptation.
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted, and articles presenting validation of OHRQoL instruments in adults were included. Data were collected about the validation type: external validation (correlations/associations); or internal validation (factor analysis/principal components analysis, item response theory); and cross-cultural adaptation.
RESULTS
Of 3730 references identified, 326 were included reporting 392 studies. Forty-two original instruments were found among 74 different versions, 40 generic and 34 condition-specific. Locker's theoretical framework was the predominant model. The oral health impact profile (OHIP) presented 20 versions, with OHIP-14 being the most frequent (26.8%), followed by geriatric oral assessment index (GOHAI) (14.0%), OHIP-49 (11.7%) and oral impacts on daily performances (OIDP) (9.7%). Most studies focused on external validation (65.3%), while internal validation was reported in 24.8% (n = 26) of OHIP-14 studies, 50.9% (n = 28) of GOHAI and 21.1% (n = 8) of OIDP studies. Most internal validation studies were conducted in English-speaking countries (n = 33), and cross-cultural adaptation was mostly in non-English-speaking European countries (n = 40).
CONCLUSIONS
Many generic and condition-specific instruments were found, but few have gone through a rigorous internal validation process or have undergone cross-cultural adaptation. This, in turn, makes it difficult for researchers to choose an appropriate measure based on known psychometric properties. OHIP-14, OIDP and GOHAI seem to be the most widely validated instruments. Equalizing measurement properties for comparability are challenging due to theoretical heterogeneity. Future studies should assess psychometric properties, explore the factorial structure and work towards a consensus on critical issues.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Geriatric Assessment; Humans; Oral Health; Psychometrics; Quality of Life; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 34409626
DOI: 10.1111/cdoe.12689 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Jun 2023Multiple outcome prediction models have been developed for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC). This systematic review aimed to identify HNSCC outcome... (Review)
Review
Multiple outcome prediction models have been developed for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma (HNSCC). This systematic review aimed to identify HNSCC outcome prediction model studies, assess their methodological quality and identify those with potential utility for clinical practice. Inclusion criteria were mucosal HNSCC prognostic prediction model studies (development or validation) incorporating clinically available variables accessible at time of treatment decision making and predicting tumour-related outcomes. Eligible publications were identified from PubMed and Embase. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using the checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies (CHARMS) and prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). Eligible publications were categorised by study type for reporting. 64 eligible publications were identified; 55 reported model development, 37 external validations, with 28 reporting both. CHARMS checklist items relating to participants, predictors, outcomes, handling of missing data, and some model development and evaluation procedures were generally well-reported. Less well-reported were measures accounting for model overfitting and model performance measures, especially model calibration. Full model information was poorly reported (3/55 model developments), specifically model intercept, baseline survival or full model code. Most publications (54/55 model developments, 28/37 external validations) were found to have high risk of bias, predominantly due to methodological issues in the PROBAST analysis domain. The identified methodological issues may affect prediction model accuracy in heterogeneous populations. Independent external validation studies in the local population and demonstration of clinical impact are essential for the clinical implementation of outcome prediction models.
Topics: Humans; Bias; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Prognosis; Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck
PubMed: 36934895
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109629