Abstract
ObjectiveTo identify and appraise published evidence of the measurement properties for epilepsy‐specific patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) of children's health‐related quality of life (HRQoL).MethodsWe searched multiple databases for studies evaluating the measurement properties of English‐language epilepsy‐specific PROMs of children's HRQoL. We assessed the methodological quality using the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidance. We extracted data about the content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test‐retest reliability, proxy reliability, responsiveness, and precision, and assessed the measurement properties with reference to standardized criteria.ResultsWe identified 27 papers that evaluated 11 PROMs. Methodological quality was variable. Construct validity, test‐retest reliability, and internal consistency were more commonly assessed. Quality of Life in Childhood Epilepsy (QoLCE) questionnaires are parent‐reported and evaluated more than other PROMs; QoLCE‐55 has good and replicated evidence for structural and construct validity and internal consistency. Health‐Related Quality of Life Measure for Children with Epilepsy (CHEQoL) has both child and parent‐reported versions and good evidence of content, structural, and construct validity.SignificanceThis review identified two leading candidate epilepsy‐specific PROMs for measuring health‐related quality of life in children. Establishing evidence of the responsiveness of PROMs is a priority to help the interpretation of meaningful change scores.
Highlights
Epilepsy is a common, chronic neurological condition that is characterized by a tendency to have recurring seizures.[1]
We found 27 studies that evaluated the measurement properties of 11 epilepsy-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of children's health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (Figure 1)
The Quality of Life in Childhood Epilepsy (QoLCE)-55 questionnaire has good evidence of structural validity, construct validity, and internal consistency and this was replicated in other studies
Summary
The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
