-
Schizophrenia Bulletin May 2024During the last decades, an abundance of studies has investigated childhood adversity in relation to psychosis. This systematic review critically examines the...
BACKGROUND
During the last decades, an abundance of studies has investigated childhood adversity in relation to psychosis. This systematic review critically examines the methodologies employed to investigate childhood adversity in psychosis over the past decade, including operational definitions, measurement tools and characteristics, and psychometric properties of instruments used in these studies.
STUDY DESIGN
This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines (registration number CRD42022307096), and the search used the following electronic databases: PsychINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, African Index Medicus (AIM), LILACS, CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE. The search included variations and combinations of the terms targeting childhood adversity and psychosis.
STUDY RESULTS
Out of 585 identified studies published between 2010 and 2023, 341 employed a validated instrument to investigate childhood adversity. Our findings show "childhood trauma" being the most frequently examined construct, followed by "child maltreatment" or "child abuse." The short version of the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire was the dominant instrument. Physical abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse were most frequently investigated, and indeed the field appears generally to focus on child abuse and neglect over other adversities. Significant psychometric heterogeneity was observed in the selection and summarization of instrument items, with only 59% of studies documenting original psychometric validation and 22% reporting reliability in their datasets.
CONCLUSION
This review highlights substantial methodological heterogeneity in the field, pointing out biases in the research on childhood adversity and psychosis. These findings underline the need for standardized definitions and high-quality measurement tools to enhance the validity of future research in this area.
PubMed: 38811352
DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbae085 -
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology May 2024To evaluate the measurement properties of Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the measurement properties of Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING
A systematic review was performed according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO - ID: CRD42022303111. Electronic databases, reference lists, forward citation tracking, and contact with experts were used to identify studies. Eligible studies were reports developing or assessing a measurement property of a PROM measuring musculoskeletal condition specific-knowledge and/or beliefs. We assessed the methodological quality and measurement properties of included studies. A modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation approach was used to rate the quality of evidence for each PROM.
RESULTS
The literature search was performed from inception to 11th September 2023. Sixty records were included, reporting 290 individual studies, and provided information on 25 PROMs. Five PROMs presented sufficient structural validity, three presented sufficient cross-cultural validity, ten presented sufficient reliability, three presented sufficient criterion validity, six presented sufficient hypothesis-testing, and four presented sufficient responsiveness. No PROM presented sufficient evidence for content validity, internal consistency, and measurement error. Based on the available evidence, no PROM was classified as suitable for use according to the COSMIN recommendations. Twenty-four PROMs are potentially suitable for use, and one PROM is not recommended for use.
CONCLUSION
No PROM designed to assess knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions meets the COSMIN criteria of suitable for use. Most PROMs identified in this systematic review were considered as potentially suitable for use and need further high-quality research to assess their measurement properties.
PubMed: 38810841
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111398 -
Journal of Clinical Nursing May 2024Dysmenorrhea, or menstrual pain, is a subjective experience, and can only be assessed by patient-reported outcomes. These instruments should be reliable, valid and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Dysmenorrhea, or menstrual pain, is a subjective experience, and can only be assessed by patient-reported outcomes. These instruments should be reliable, valid and responsive.
AIM
To identify and critically appraise the available evidence for the measurement properties of specific patient-reported outcome measures used for dysmenorrhea.
METHODS
The PRISMA statement was used to report this systematic review. Databases searched were PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Web of Science, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar (April 2021; updated on February 2023). Original studies with primary data collection, with no restriction on language and publication date that reported psychometric properties of one or more dysmenorrhea-related patient-reported outcome measure. The literature searches, selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias were performed independently by two reviewers and followed the COSMIN guidelines.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were analysed in this review, and 19 patient-reported outcome measures were evaluated. The instruments varied in relation to the measured construct and measurement properties (validity, reliability and responsiveness). The methodological quality of the studies and the quality of evidence of the patient-reported outcome measures were variable. Among the 13 studies that reported the development of patient-reported outcome measures, most had inadequate methodological quality, and the overall rating was insufficient or inconsistent.
CONCLUSIONS
The Dysmenorrhea Symptom Interference (DSI) scale was the only identified patient-reported outcome measure that has the potential to be recommended because of its sufficient rating combined with moderate quality of evidence for content validity. Future studies should further evaluate the measurement properties of the existing patient-reported outcome measures, or develop new patient-reported outcome measures following the COSMIN methodology.
PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION
Not applicable as this is a systematic review.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO protocol: CRD42021244410. Registration on April 22, 2021.
PubMed: 38797927
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.17293 -
Rehabilitacion May 2024The objective was to perform a systematic review of those performance outcomes (HRD) tools that assess sensitivity in post-stroke subjects, as well as to know which of... (Review)
Review
The objective was to perform a systematic review of those performance outcomes (HRD) tools that assess sensitivity in post-stroke subjects, as well as to know which of all is the most reliable and viable. The design was a systematic review. The following were included: HRD, developed in post-stroke subjects, of any etiology and period of evolution; 18 years of age or older and testing for sensitivity; results on psychometric properties. Excluded: self-reported results, the report of cross-cultural adaptation, designed through computerized means. 19 HRD were acquired. The psychometric properties analyzed were reliability, internal consistency, measurement error, construct validity, content validity, and sensitivity to change, the first being the most studied. Psychometric properties were identified, assessed, compared, and summarized. Of all of them, we recommend the use of the modified Erasmus Nottingham Sensory Assessment, as it presents the best degree of confidence in the evidence.
PubMed: 38795503
DOI: 10.1016/j.rh.2024.100855 -
Hand Surgery & Rehabilitation Jun 2024This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis and in-depth analysis of the quality of the different cross-cultural versions of the MHQ. This study was...
This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis and in-depth analysis of the quality of the different cross-cultural versions of the MHQ. This study was conducted using Pubmed, Web of Science, CINAHL and SCOPUS databases to identify cross-cultural validation studies of the MHQ. Methodological quality, quality of evidence and criteria for good measurement properties of these studies were applied for each psychometric property. Quality assessment and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers according to the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. A total of 493 articles were identified, of which 22 were included and 20 were analysed.Of the six properties analysed, responsiveness and hypothesis testing for construct validity had the highest methodological quality and quality of evidence, and met the criteria for good measurement properties. The lowest quality properties were measurement error and internal consistency. The different cross-cultural versions of the MHQ were found to be reliable, valid and able to detect clinical change. The lack of development of measurement error, formulation of an a priori hypothesis or structural validity affects the detection of small clinical changes and their discriminative capacity.
Topics: Humans; Psychometrics; Cross-Cultural Comparison; Surveys and Questionnaires; Reproducibility of Results; Hand; Disability Evaluation
PubMed: 38782363
DOI: 10.1016/j.hansur.2024.101715 -
Geriatric Nursing (New York, N.Y.) May 2024This systematic review aimed to describe the characteristics of instruments that assess eating ability and/or mealtime behaviors in persons living with dementia, and...
This systematic review aimed to describe the characteristics of instruments that assess eating ability and/or mealtime behaviors in persons living with dementia, and evaluate their psychometric properties. Five databases were searched for relevant records between 1/1/1980 and 5/25/2023. Records included instruments assessing eating ability and/or mealtime behaviors of people with dementia. The psychometric quality of the instruments was evaluated using the Psychometric Assessment for Self-report and Observational Tools (PAT). 45 eligible instruments were identified from 115 records. While 38 instruments were scored as having low psychometric quality, 7 had moderate quality. Edinburgh Feeding Evaluation in Dementia (EdFED), Mealtime Difficulty Scale for older adults with Dementia (MDSD), and Dementia Hyperphagic Behavior Scale (DHBS) were scored as having the highest quality (total PAT score = 9). Further refinement of existing instruments and additional psychometric testing in larger, diverse samples will improve pragmatic use in dementia mealtime care research and practice.
PubMed: 38781628
DOI: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2024.05.005 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Reports Jun 2024Instruments to measure substance use stigma are emerging, however little is known regarding their psychometric properties. While research has evolved to view substance... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Instruments to measure substance use stigma are emerging, however little is known regarding their psychometric properties. While research has evolved to view substance use stigma as a context sensitive international phenomenon that is embedded within cultures, validated self-report measures are lacking and comprehensive reviews of the existing measures are extremely limited. In this systematic review of substance use stigma and shame measures, we aim to contextualize results from existing research, lay the groundwork for future measurement development research, and provide a thorough resource for research scientists currently designing studies to measure substance use stigma.
METHODS
We searched three databases using Boolean search terms for psychometric evaluations of measures of substance use stigma and shame and evaluated the quality/psychometric properties using an adaptation of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) systematic review guidelines.
RESULTS
We identified 18 measures of substance use stigma. Overall, most measures had minimal psychometric assessments and none of the measures met all domains of the COSMIN measure quality criteria. However, most studies reported satisfactory factor analyses and internal consistency scores.
CONCLUSIONS
Most measures of substance use stigma and shame had psychometric assessment across a limited range of criteria and no measures of structural substance use stigma were found. The most reported psychometric properties were structural validity and convergent validity. We suggest future researchers investigate test-retest reliability and cross-cultural validity for existing substance use stigma measures, as well as develop and evaluate novel measures assessing structural stigma of substance use.
PubMed: 38779475
DOI: 10.1016/j.dadr.2024.100237 -
Australian Critical Care : Official... May 2024We aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score used by nurses and physicians...
Comparison of Glasgow Coma Scale and Full Outline of UnResponsiveness score to assess the level of consciousness in patients admitted to intensive care units and emergency departments: A quantitative systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to investigate the reliability and validity of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and the Full Outline of UnResponsiveness (FOUR) score used by nurses and physicians to assess the level of consciousness in patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) and emergency departments (EDs).
REVIEW METHOD USED
This systematic review was guided by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and followed the reporting standards of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Statement.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic search was conducted using the following databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE.
REVIEW METHODS
All authors performed the study selection process, data collection, and assessment of quality. The following psychometric properties were addressed: inter-rater reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity.
RESULTS
Six articles were included. The GCS and the FOUR scores demonstrated excellent reliability and very strong validity when used by nurses and physicians to assess the level of consciousness in patients admitted to the ICU and ED. The FOUR score demonstrated slightly higher overall reliability and validity than the GCS.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review indicates that the FOUR score is especially suitable for assessing the level of consciousness in patients admitted to the ICU and ED. The FOUR score demonstrated higher reliability and validity than the GCS, making it a promising alternative assessment scale, despite the GCS's longstanding use in clinical practice.
PubMed: 38777642
DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2024.03.012 -
Eating and Weight Disorders : EWD May 2024Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a mental disorder for which hospitalization is frequently needed in case of severe medical and psychiatric consequences. We aim to describe the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a mental disorder for which hospitalization is frequently needed in case of severe medical and psychiatric consequences. We aim to describe the state-of-the-art inpatient treatment of AN in real-world reports.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature on the major medical databases, spanning from January 2011 to October 2023, was performed, using the keywords: "inpatient", "hospitalization" and "anorexia nervosa". Studies on pediatric populations and inpatients in residential facilities were excluded.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven studies (3501 subjects) were included, and nine themes related to the primary challenges faced in hospitalization settings were selected. About 81.48% of the studies detailed the clinical team, 51.85% cited the use of a psychotherapeutic model, 25.93% addressed motivation, 100% specified the treatment setting, 66.67% detailed nutrition and refeeding, 22.22% cited pharmacological therapy, 40.74% described admission or discharge criteria and 14.81% follow-up, and 51.85% used tests for assessment of the AN or psychopathology. Despite the factors defined by international guidelines, the data were not homogeneous and not adequately defined on admission/discharge criteria, pharmacological therapy, and motivation, while more comprehensive details were available for treatment settings, refeeding protocols, and psychometric assessments.
CONCLUSION
Though the heterogeneity among the included studies was considered, the existence of sparse criteria, objectives, and treatment modalities emerged, outlining a sometimes ambiguous report of hospitalization practices. Future studies must aim for a more comprehensive description of treatment approaches. This will enable uniform depictions of inpatient treatment, facilitating comparisons across different studies and establishing guidelines more grounded in scientific evidence.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level I, systematic review.
Topics: Humans; Anorexia Nervosa; Hospitalization; Inpatients; Adult; Psychotherapy
PubMed: 38767754
DOI: 10.1007/s40519-024-01665-5 -
Assessment May 2024Empirically supported measures of suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) are needed to serve as reference outcomes for suicide risk screening tools and to monitor... (Review)
Review
Empirically supported measures of suicidal thoughts and behaviors (STBs) are needed to serve as reference outcomes for suicide risk screening tools and to monitor severity and treatment progress in children and adolescents with STBs. The present paper systematically reviewed existing measures of STBs in youth and studies evaluating their psychometric properties and clinical utility. Measures were then evaluated on reliability, validity, and clinical utility. Sixteen articles (20 independent samples) were found with psychometric data with youth samples for eight measures. Interview-based measures were found to have the strongest psychometric support and clinical utility. Significant limitations exist for all self-report measures due to inherent characteristics of these measures that cannot be remedied through additional psychometric study. There is an urgent need for the development and validation of new self-report measures of STBs, particularly for preadolescent children, sexual and gender minority youth, and racial/ethnic minority youth.
PubMed: 38742801
DOI: 10.1177/10731911241249438