COnsensus-based Standards For The Selection Of Health Measurement INstruments Research Articles

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PurposeAlthough comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.MethodsThe development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.ResultsFrom the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final checklist to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review’s title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.ConclusionPRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding explanation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application.NoteIn order to encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on the web sites of the journals: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes; Journal of Clinical Epidemiology; Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes; Quality of Life Research.

Validated German PROMs for People with Major Amputation of the Lower Extremity - A Narrative Review Based on the Final Report of the LEAD and COMPASS Initiative of the ISPO

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) play an important role in the rehabilitation of people with major limb amputations. Patient-completed questionnaires help collect specific constructs on this patient population. The COMPASS and LEAD initiatives, carried out by the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics (ISPO), underscore the importance of regularly collecting high-quality PROMs. These are essential for the evaluation of rehabilitation needs, progress, and success. In the final report of ISPO's major international initiative, PROMs recommendations of the expert panel are tabulated. In Table 3.2 of the report, ISPO lists n=12 PROMs that were included in the narrow consensus process were considered to be of acceptable quality, and therefore recommended. The aim of this systematic review was to specifically search for these recommended PROMS regarding their availability in a German and validated version in order to identify potential gaps. All PROMs that were available in a German and validated version were then examined further with regard to the quality of the validation study, using the checklist of COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). Through a systematic literature search, six validated German-language versions were found. Only four of these met the quality standards of the COSMIN checklist sufficiently. Overall, this review shows serious gaps in the availability in the German language of validated versions of PROMs used internationally and recommended as standard by the ISPO. This gap needs to be closed by guideline-oriented translation and subsequent validation studies in order to be able to offer and collect the PROMS recommended by the ISPO also for German-speaking patient populations.

Screening for adverse social conditions in child healthcare settings: protocol for a systematic review

IntroductionAdverse social conditions affect children’s development and health outcomes from preconception throughout their life course. Early identification of adverse conditions is essential for early support of children and their families....

Psychometric Testing of the Thai Version of Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory Version 4c in Patients With Stroke.

Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory version 4c is a non-disease-specific self-care measure used in individuals with multiple chronic conditions. This instrument may be applied to patients with specific diseases such as stroke. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Thai version of the Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory version 4c in patients with stroke. This multicenter, cross-sectional study adhered to the COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) guidelines and enrolled patients with stroke from 16 primary care centers in southern Thailand. Structural validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency reliability using Cronbach α coefficient and global reliability index, and test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients. The final analysis included a total of 350 participants. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the 2-factor Self-Care Maintenance scale structure, although the item allocation to the dimensions differed from that of the original model. The Self-Care Monitoring scale demonstrated a 1-factor structure with permitted residual covariance. The Self-Care Management scale maintained a 2-factor structure, similar to that of the original model. Simultaneous confirmatory factor analysis of the combined items supported the general model with the 3 scales. The Self-Care Maintenance scale exhibited marginally adequate α (0.68) and ω (0.66) coefficients, and an adequate composite reliability index (0.79). The other 2 scales demonstrated adequate α (range, 0.79-0.86), ω (range, 0.75-0.86), and composite reliability (range, 0.83-0.86) indices. Intraclass correlation coefficients showed adequate test-retest reliability for all scales (range, 0.76-0.90). The generic self-care measure, Self-Care of Chronic Illness Inventory version 4c, demonstrated strong psychometric properties in patients with stroke. This instrument may be a valuable tool for assessing stroke self-care in Thailand.

Cognitive testing of the Children’s Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) with children, young people and their parents/carers

Background: The Children’s Palliative Outcome Scale (C-POS) is being developed using best methodological guidance on outcome measure development, This recommends cognitive testing, an established method of item improvement, prior to psychometric testing. Aim: To cognitively test C-POS within the target population to establish comprehensibility, comprehensiveness, relevance and acceptability. Design: Cross-sectional cognitive interview study following COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology and Rothrock guidance on outcome measure development. Cognitive interviews were conducted using ‘think aloud’ and verbal probing techniques. Setting/participants: Children 5–⩽17 years old with life-limiting conditions and parents/carers of children with life-limiting conditions were recruited from 14 UK sites. Results: Forty-eight individuals participated (36 parents; 12 children) in cognitively testing the five versions of C-POS over two to seven rounds. Content and length were acceptable, and all questions were considered important. Refinements were made to parent/carer versions to be inclusive of non-verbal children such as changing ‘share’ to ‘express’ feelings; and ‘being able to ask questions’ to ‘having the appropriate information’. Changes to improve comprehensibility of items such as ‘living life to the fullest’ were also made. Parents reported that completing an outcome measure can be distressing but this is anticipated and that being asked is important. Conclusion: Cognitive interviewing has facilitated refinement of the C-POS, especially for non-verbal children who represent a large proportion of those with a life-limiting condition. This study has enhanced the face and content validity of the measure and provided preliminary evidence for acceptability for use in routine practice.

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

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. The aim of this study is to assess the reliability of the MoveMed battery of performance outcome measures. 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. 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. The criteria from COSMIN provide "very good" quality evidence of the reliability of the MoveMed tests in an adult population living with DCM.

Responsiveness and construct validity of two outcome measures of bilateral upper limb function in patients with chronic stroke

BackgroundStroke is a leading cause of long-term disability among stroke survivors. Despite the availability of numerous stroke rehabilitative therapies, such as mirror therapy, bilateral arm training, and robot-assisted therapy, the recovery of motor function after stroke remains incomplete. Bilateral arm function is a key component in stroke patients to perform activities of daily living and to reflect their functional autonomy.ObjectiveThis clinimetric study investigated and compared the construct validity and responsiveness of 2 bimanual activity outcome measures, the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) and the ABILHAND Questionnaire, in individuals receiving stroke rehabilitation.MethodsThe present study is a secondary analysis following the framework of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). Individuals with chronic stroke (N = 113) were recruited from outpatient rehabilitation settings. Participants received 18 to 20 sessions of robot-assisted therapy, mirror therapy, combined therapy, or conventional rehabilitation for 4 to 6 weeks. The CAHAI, ABILHAND Questionnaire, and a comparison instrument, the Motor Activity Log (MAL), were administered twice at a 4- to 6-week interval to all participants. ABILHAND scores, in logits, were converted from raw ordinal scores into a linear measure.ResultsThere was medium to large correlation of the CAHAI and the MAL (ρ = 0.60–0.62, p < 0.01) as well as the ABILHAND Questionnaire and the MAL (ρ = 0.44–0.51, p < 0.01). Change scores from the initial measurement to the post-intervention measurement demonstrated small to medium correlation of the CAHAI and the MAL (ρ = 0.27–0.31, p < 0.01) and medium to large correlation of the ABILHAND Questionnaire and the MAL (ρ = 0.37–0.41, p < 0.01). Overall, 7 of 8 hypotheses were supported. The hypothesis testing regarding the construct validity and responsiveness of the CAHAI and ABILHAND Questionnaire was confirmed.ConclusionThe CAHAI and ABILHAND Questionnaire are both responsive and suitable to detect changes in bilateral arm functional daily activities in individuals with chronic stroke. Patient-reported outcome measures are recommended to use along with therapist-rated outcome measures for upper limb capacity evaluation in stroke rehabilitation. Further study with a prospective study design to capture specific clinical features of participants and the use of body-worn sensors, such as the arm accelerometer, is suggested.

An evaluation of the psychometric properties of the Australian Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool

Objectives This study aimed to validate the Collaborative Practice Assessment Tool (CPAT) in the Australian setting and provide a quality instrument in terms of psychometric properties that can be used to measure interprofessional outcomes for both healthcare practitioners and students. The outcomes evaluated include the capacity to work in an interprofessional team, good interprofessional communication skills, leadership skills, ensuring clear division of tasks and roles in a team, effective conflict management, and being actively involved with patients and their families/communities in care. Methods The COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) taxonomy and standards were used as guides for evaluating the psychometric properties of the Australian CPAT, which include evaluations regarding instrument development requirements of sample target and size, content validity, internal structure (structural validity, internal consistency reliability and measurement invariance), and hypotheses testing. CPAT Australia was developed through two stages involving pilot studies and a validation study, both of which included healthcare practitioners and students as participants. A pilot study examined content validity regarding item relevance, item comprehensibility, and instrument comprehensiveness. The validation study was carried out to assess the internal structure of CPAT Australia for aspects of structural validity, internal consistency reliabilities, and configural, metric and scalar measurement invariance. The structural validity was explored using the following three steps: exploratory, confirmatory, and multi-group factor analysis. Construct validity was evaluated to confirm direct and indirect paths of assumptions based on a previously validated model. Data collected between August 2021 and May 2022. Results The content validity evaluation confirmed that all items were relevant, understandable and comprehensive for measuring interprofessional collaborative care in Australia. Three hundred ninety-nine participants contributed to the validation study (n=152 practitioners; n=247 students). The original instrument model of 8-Factor 56-Item was improved in the Australian CPAT. Two items, Item 27 (Physicians assume the ultimate responsibility) and Item 49 (Final decision rest with the physician), were consistently rejected and therefore discarded. The internal structure of the 7-Factor 54-Item solution was confirmed as a suitable model with fit indices meeting COSMIN standards for a good model in practitioner and student cohorts. Configural, metric and scalar invariances were confirmed, indicating the invariance of the instruments when used for the practitioner and student cohorts. The construct validity evaluation indicated that 81.3% of direct and indirect assumptions were accepted, fulfilling the COSMIN requirement of >75% of proposed assumptions being accepted. Conclusion The Australian CPAT with a 7-factor 54-item solution was confirmed as a quality measure for assessing interprofessional education and collaborative practice for both healthcare practitioners and students in Australia with robust psychometric properties.

Questionnaires assessing knowledge and beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions are potentially suitable for use, but further research is needed: a systematic review

ObjectivesTo evaluate the measurement properties of Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for knowledge and/or beliefs about musculoskeletal conditions. Study Design and SettingA 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. ResultsThe 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. ConclusionNo 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.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Neuromuscular Diseases: A Scoping Review.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are valuable in comprehensively understanding patients' health experiences and informing healthcare decisions in research and clinical care without clinicians' input. Until now, no central resource containing information on all PROMS in neuromuscular diseases (NMD) is available, hindering the comparison and choice of PROMs used to monitor NMDs and appropriately reflect the patient's voice. This scoping review aimed to present a comprehensive assessment of the existing literature on using PROMs in children and adults with NMD. A scoping methodology was followed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines to assess the literature on PROMs in NMDs. Eligibility criteria encompassed articles describing psychometric development or evaluation of generic or disease-specific PROM-based instruments for adults and children with specific NMDs. The data charting process involved extracting measurement properties of included PROMs, comprising validity, reliability, responsiveness, and interpretability information. The review identified 190 PROMs evaluated across 247 studies in individuals with NMDs. The majority of PROMs were disease specific. The physical functioning domain was most assessed. Validity was the most frequently investigated measurement property, with a limited number of PROMs sufficiently evaluated for a range of psychometric characteristics. There is a strong need for further research on the responsiveness and interpretability of PROMs and the development of PROMs on social functioning in NMD.

Reliability and Validity of Maximal Respiratory Pressures.

Maximal respiratory pressure is used to assess the inspiratory and expiratory muscles strength by using maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax ) and maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax). This study aimed to summarize and evaluate the reliability and validity of maximal respiratory pressure measurements. This systematic review followed the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations and was reported by using the PRISMA checklist. Studies published before March 2023 were searched in PubMed and EMBASE databases. A total of 642 studies were identified by using the online search strategy and manual search (602 and 40, respectively). Twenty-three studies were included. The level of evidence for test-retest reliability was moderate for PImax and PEmax (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.70 for both), inter-rater reliability was low for PImax and very low for PEmax (intraclass correlation coefficient > 0.70 for both), and the measurement error was very low for PImax and PEmax. In addition, concurrent validity presented a high level of evidence for PImax and PEmax (r > 0.80). Only concurrent validity of maximal respiratory pressure measured with the manometers evaluated in this review presented a high level of evidence. The quality of clinical studies by using maximal respiratory pressure would be improved if more high-quality studies on measurement properties, by following well established guidelines and the COSMIN initiative, were available.

Measuring the purpose in life in the adult population: A scoping review.

The purpose in life can motivate individuals to realize that life is essential for existence and well-being. Adults might experience crises that can lead to a lack of purpose in life. Consequently, promoting purpose in life is necessary, but it requires a suitable measurement scale. This scoping review aimed to identify and map the content, psychometric properties, and answer option scales of instruments intended to measure purpose in life in adult populations. A scoping review was employed. The database used was PubMed. The libraries were APA PsycNet, Wiley Online Library, and Cochrane Library. The search strategy was performed between 1 November 2023 and 14 February 2024. This review used the scoping review framework described by Arksey and O'Malley. The identified instruments were assessed for quality based on the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) criteria. This study also used the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guideline. A total of 348 studies were identified, and seven articles were involved in the final synthesis. These seven articles included five instruments measuring the concept of purpose in life, of which two instruments had two versions: 1) Purpose in Life Test (20 items, 4 items); 2) Life Engagement Test (6 items); 3) Psychological Well-Being (120 items, 18 items); 4) Self-Assessment Goal Achievement (9 items); and 5) National Institutes of Health Tuberculosis Meaning and Purpose Scale Age 18+ (18 items). The validity of all instruments was tested using factor analysis, known groups, face, concurrent, convergent, discriminant, and construct validity. The reliability of four instruments was tested by Cronbach's alpha and Spearman-Brown formula. Five instruments measuring purpose in life in the adult population with adequate psychometric properties were identified. The clinical implication of this study suggests that nurses may consider employing an appropriate instrument to assess the purpose of life in the adult population, thus enabling them to offer holistic, individualized care to adults, particularly addressing the spiritual dimension.

Systematic Review and Psychometric Properties Analysis of First-, Middle-, and Top-Level Nurse Manager’s Core Competencies Instruments

Purpose. Healthcare organisations need to define the role of the nurse manager in light of recent global health developments. For this purpose, several core competencies essential for each hierarchical management level need to be assessed. Different measurement instruments have been developed to assess nurse managers’ competencies. This systematic review summarises the characteristics and psychometric properties of existing instruments measuring first-, middle-, and top-level nurse managers’ competencies. Methods. Following PRISMA guidelines for reporting and COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines, 789 articles were retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, and APA PsycINFO databases with no time limitation. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023425854). Results. Ten tools were identified, assessing one or more competencies among nurse managers: Competency Elements for Nurse Managers of Tertiary General Hospitals, NICA-NL, HCCI, I-FLNMMCS, NMCI, Chase Nurse Manager Competency Questionnaire, CASHN, Questionnaire for Head Nurses’ Managerial Competencies, Nurse Manager EBP Competency Scale, and the Home Healthcare Nurse Manager Assessment Tool. Conclusion. Following the COSMIN assessment, the Chase Nurse Manager Competency Instrument was the most comprehensive among the included instruments, and the CASHN questionnaire scored highest on methodological quality and level of evidence. These instruments can be used in clinical practice to evaluate competencies and as a basis for developing managerial training courses.

Psychometric properties of stigma and discrimination measurement tools for persons living with HIV: a systematic review using the COSMIN methodology

BackgroundThe development of antiretroviral therapy broadly extends the life expectancy of persons living with HIV (PLHIV). However, stigma and discrimination are still great threat to these individuals and the world's public health care system. Accurate and reproducible measures are prerequisites for robust results. Therefore, it is essential to choose an acceptable measure with satisfactory psychometric properties to assess stigma and discrimination. There has been no systematic review of different stigma and discrimination tools in the field of HIV care. Researchers and clinical practitioners do not have a solid reference for selecting stigma and discrimination measurement tools.MethodsWe systematically searched English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, The Cochrane Library, CNKI,, and Wanfang, to obtain literature about stigma and discrimination measurement tools that have been developed and applied in the field of HIV. The search period was from 1st January, 1996 to 22nd November 2021. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline (2018 version) was applied to assess the risk of bias for each involved study and summarize the psychometric properties of each tool. The modified version of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and, Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to grade the evidence and develop recommendations.ResultsWe included 45 studies and 19 PROMs for HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination among PLHIV. All studies had sufficient methodological quality in content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, and the hypothesis testing of structural validity. Limited evidence was found for cross-cultural validity, stability, and criterion validity. No relevant evidence was found concerning measurement error and responsiveness. The Internalized AIDS-related Stigma Scale (IARSS), Internalized HIV Stigma Scale (IHSS), and Wright's HIV stigma scale (WHSS) are recommended for use.ConclusionsThis study recommends three PROMs for different stigma and discrimination scenarios, including IARSS for its good quality and convenience, IHSS for its broader range of items, higher sensitivity, and greater precision, and WHSS for its comprehensive and quick screening. Researchers should also consider the relevance and feasibility of the measurements before putting them into practice.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42022308579

Moral distress measurement in animal care workers: a systematic review

ObjectivesThe mental health of veterinary and other animal health professionals is significantly impacted by the psychological stressors they encounter, such as euthanasia, witnessing animal suffering and moral distress. Moral distress,...

Assessing the Psychometric Properties of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale: A Systematic Review Using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN).

The Illness Management and Recovery Scale (IMR-S) is based on the IMR program, developed to assess the recovery process for people with severe mental disorders by considering the perceptions of clients and clinicians involved in it. The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the IMR-S so as to determine the reliability and suitability of its scores for evaluating recovery. Two coders searched five databases for studies, published between January 2004 and May 2023, that describe the psychometric assessment of the IMR-S. Studies were assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. Finally, 46 papers were included. Methodological quality was very good for most of the studies that provide information on internal validity, and limited for those that report on responsiveness. Measurement properties were positive for convergent validity and measurement error. The quality of evidence was high for structural validity studies. Although this study only includes research published in English and may have overlooked certain psychometric properties evaluated in studies published in other languages, our findings suggest that the IMR-S is a valid and reliable instrument, demonstrating its potential to offer guidance for clinical practice.

Validity and reliability of outcome measures to assess dysfunctional breathing: a systematic review

ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically review the psychometric properties of outcome measures that assess dysfunctional breathing (DB) in adults.MethodsStudies on developing and evaluating measurement properties to assess DB were included....

Measurement properties of the Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS) validation studies: a systematic review protocol

IntroductionMental Health Literacy (MHL) is important for improving mental health and reducing inequities in treatment. The Mental Health Literacy Scale (MHLS) is a valid and reliable assessment tool for MHL....

Examination of the structural components of the Abilitator-A self-report questionnaire on work ability and functioning aimed at the population in a weak labour market position.

According to the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) panel, structural validity describes how well Patient-Reported Outcome Measures' (PROM) scores reflect the dimensions of the measured construct. The main purpose of this study was to examine the structural components of the Abilitator, a co-developed self-report questionnaire on work ability and functioning for the population in a weak labour market position. We examined to what extent the Abilitator has reflective and formative elements in its five summary scales: "C. Inclusion", "D. Mind", "E. Everyday life", "F. Skills", and "G. Body". The Abilitator data sample (n = 4555, men 51%, mean age 37 years) was collected in 2017-2022 by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health in cooperation with the European Social Fund Priority 5 projects in which the participants have multiple challenges to gain employment. For the structural components and validity analysis we implemented both Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA). Based on the COSMIN criteria for structural validity, the Abilitator reached approximate model fit with CFA when we analysed the different concepts of the questionnaire separately rather than in one unified model. An exception was "E. Everyday life" which was a formative summary scale, and it did not reach approximate fit. EFA showed that the items in the Abilitator's summary scales loaded on ten factors. The Abilitator had both reflective and formative elements in its structure. It reached structural validity in those separate concepts that were based on a reflective model. This study revealed interesting connections between different aspects of the Abilitator and produced valuable information for further modification of the questionnaire.

Measurement Instruments Assessing Multi-Faceted Stigma Regarding Sexual and Gender Minorities: A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties.

Stigma against sexual and gender minorities (SGM) populations has serious negative health effects for SGM populations. Despite the growing need for accurate stigma measurement in SGM, there are insufficient valid measurement instruments. Moreover, the lack of consistency in construct usage makes comparisons across studies particularly challenging. A critical review and comparative evaluation of the psychometric properties of the various stigma measures for SGM is necessary to advance our understanding regarding stigma measurement against/among SGMs. Based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in 4 bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science) for empirical articles published from 2010 to 2022 that evaluated the psychometrics properties of measurement instruments assessing stigma against SGMs. The screening, extraction, and scoring of the psychometric properties and methodological quality of selected instruments were performed by following the established standards and COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) checklist, respectively. Of the 2031 studies identified, 19 studies were included that reported psychometric properties of 17 measurement instruments. All instruments, except two, were developed for SGMs (n = 15/17). Most instruments included men who have sex with men (MSM) or gay men (n = 11/15), whereas less than half of the instruments assessed stigma among SGM women (n = 6/15). Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and content validity was reported for all instruments (n = 17); construct and structural validity was also reported for majority of the instruments (n = 15 and 10, respectively). However, test-retest reliability and criterion validity was reported for very few instruments (n = 5 each). Based on the COSMIN checklist, we identified the most psychometrically and methodologically robust instruments for each of the five stigma types: combined stigma, enacted stigma, internalized stigma, intersectional stigma, and perceived stigma. For each stigma type, except anticipated stigma, at least one instrument demonstrated strong promise for use in empirical research; however, the selection of instrument depends on the target population and context of the study. Findings indicated a growing use of instruments assessing multiple stigma types. Future studies need to develop intersectional stigma instruments that account for the multiple and intersecting social identities of SGMs. Additionally, most existing instruments would benefit from further psychometric testing, especially on test-retest reliability, criterion validity, adaptability to different LGBTQIA + populations and cultures.