Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Usually there is a number of measurement instruments available to measure the same outcome in RCTs. This hampers comparison of the results obtained and poses challenges in systematic reviews of RCTs. To choose the most appropriate instrument(s) for a given outcome, systematic reviews of measurement instruments are needed that integrate the evidence found in the literature on the measurement properties of these instruments, such as validity and reliability. The number of such reviews of measurement instruments is increasing rapidly, but the quality is highly variable.
Objectives: To present a 10-step procedure for performing systematic reviews of measurement instruments, based on Cochrane methodology. In this presentation a review on neck pain and disability questionnaires will be used as an example.
Methods: Bibliographic databases have to be searched for articles concerning the development or evaluation of the measurement properties of relevant instruments. We developed a methodological filter to select these studies. The methodological quality of the selected studies should be critically appraised, separately by two independent raters. The COSMIN checklist is specifically designed for evaluating studies on measurement properties.
Results: There are various types of data to be presented: characteristics of the measurement instruments (e.g. number and types of domains and number of items, response format), characteristics of the study sample (e.g. age, gender, disease characteristics, setting), methodological quality of the studies, the results of the measurement properties, and levels of evidence regarding the various measurement properties for each instrument.
Conclusions: Only sound systematic reviews provide reliable data to inform the choice of the most appropriate instrument(s) for measuring a specific outcome. Agreement on the use of only one or a few high quality measurement instruments to assess a specific outcome facilitates comparability of the results of future RCTs and the conduct of future systematic reviews of these RCTs.
Objectives: To present a 10-step procedure for performing systematic reviews of measurement instruments, based on Cochrane methodology. In this presentation a review on neck pain and disability questionnaires will be used as an example.
Methods: Bibliographic databases have to be searched for articles concerning the development or evaluation of the measurement properties of relevant instruments. We developed a methodological filter to select these studies. The methodological quality of the selected studies should be critically appraised, separately by two independent raters. The COSMIN checklist is specifically designed for evaluating studies on measurement properties.
Results: There are various types of data to be presented: characteristics of the measurement instruments (e.g. number and types of domains and number of items, response format), characteristics of the study sample (e.g. age, gender, disease characteristics, setting), methodological quality of the studies, the results of the measurement properties, and levels of evidence regarding the various measurement properties for each instrument.
Conclusions: Only sound systematic reviews provide reliable data to inform the choice of the most appropriate instrument(s) for measuring a specific outcome. Agreement on the use of only one or a few high quality measurement instruments to assess a specific outcome facilitates comparability of the results of future RCTs and the conduct of future systematic reviews of these RCTs.