Systematic Review Of Measurement Properties Research Articles

Health-related quality of life in osteoporosis: a systematic review of measurement properties of the QUALEFFO-41.

The 41-item Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) is a widely used and freely available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). However, data on its reliability, validity, and responsiveness remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review the measurement properties of the QUALEFFO-41. A systematic search of MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, and Cochrane Library from their inception up to December 2022 was performed. Data were extracted, and the methodological quality of each measurement property was evaluated according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines. The evidence of the measurement properties was rated against the updated criteria for good measurement properties, and the quality of evidence was graded using the modified GRADE approach. A total of 99 articles were identified, of which eight studies were included in the review. The QUALEFFO-41 is categorized as B as it demonstrated moderate quality evidence for sufficient content validity, moderate-to-high quality evidence for sufficient hypothesis testing for construct validity (except for the social function domain for convergent validity), and very low-quality evidence for sufficient responsiveness. For structural validity and internal consistency, only the domains of pain and general health perception were sufficient with low-quality evidence. For reliability, only the domain of physical function was sufficient with low-quality evidence. None of the studies reported measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and criterion validity. The QUALEFFO-41 may be a promising, valid, and reliable PROM to assess HRQoL in osteoporosis patients with vertebral fractures. However, future studies must focus on good methodological quality to strengthen the evidence of measurement properties, especially on structural validity, reliability, responsiveness, and cross-cultural validity. The systematic review evaluated the measurement properties of the QUALEFFO-41 questionnaire for assessing Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in osteoporosis patients. The review found moderate-to-high-quality evidence for construct validity but limited evidence for responsiveness and other properties. Future studies should focus on strengthening the evidence, particularly for structural validity, reliability, responsiveness, and cross-cultural validity. The QUALEFFO-41 shows promise as a valid and reliable PROM for HRQoL assessment in osteoporosis patients.

The measurement of fatigue in clinicians within hospital settings: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Medical staff fatigue leads to accidents and mistakes and puts patient safety at risk. A measure of fatigue in the workplace may help to quantify, predict, and manage fatigue. This review aimed to evaluate instruments used to measure fatigue in medical staff within hospitals. A systematic review following the JBI methodology was undertaken. A search for articles was conducted in 2021. Included articles (all validation studies) were assessed for methodological quality using the COSMIN checklist. Measurement property data was evaluated for Quality of Evidence using GRADE methodology. Ten studies representing five instruments were reviewed: Occupational Fatigue Exertion and Recovery scale (now superseded); Occupational Fatigue Exertion and Recovery scale (15-item); Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; Need for Recovery Scale; and the Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory. Four instruments show promise for measuring fatigue in hospital medical staff, however, there is limited certainty in the measure property estimates. The Quality of Evidence for measurement properties for all instruments is insufficient. Further validation studies following the COSMIN standards are needed before recommendations for use can be made.

A systematic review of the measurement properties of the Pennsylvania Shoulder Score

BackgroundPennsylvania Shoulder Score (PSS) is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that is gaining use when examining shoulder-specific outcomes. To date, a systematic review of the PSS measurement properties has not been published. PurposeTo systematically locate, appraise, and synthesize the evidence concerning the measurement properties of the PSS. Study DesignSystematic literature review. MethodsA pair of raters conducted a literature search using pre-defined keywords from 5 databases (PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTdiscus, PsychINFO, Scopus) during the week of October 23, 2022. Critical appraisal of study design for psychometric articles was used to assess methodological quality and risk of bias. Measurement property data were synthesized with pooled estimates for the indices of test-retest reliability (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), Cronbach α (CA), effect size (ES), and standardized response means (SRM) calculated from applicable studies. ResultsA total of 13 articles met the inclusion criteria for this review. Methodological quality was agreed upon between the 2 raters with a weighted kappa of 0.77, and 9/13 of the articles were rated above 70%. Test-retest reliability of the PSS total score ranged between 0.90 and 0.94, and construct validity was high when compared to other shoulder-specific PROMs (0.75 < r > 0.96). Responsiveness of the PSS was large across all studies with few PSS subscales dropping to moderate. Pooled MDC90 of the total PSS was 12.13 points, and the pooled ES of the total PSS was 0.85. ConclusionsThe scope of this review demonstrates positive measurement properties of the PSS as a reliable, valid, and responsive measurement of shoulder-specific PROM. However, there are few studies examining the measurement properties of the PSS and more research is needed to assess cross-cultural appropriateness and factor analysis of the questions contained in the PSS.

Pain coping tools for children and young adults with a neurodevelopmental disability: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Linked Article: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/dmcn.15410

Measurement instruments to evaluate diaper dermatitis in children: Systematic review of measurement properties.

The aim of this study was to summarize and evaluate the empirical evidence on the measurement properties of diaper dermatitis (DD) measurement instruments in children. Systematic review. MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were systematically searched until 14 June 2021. Citation searching was conducted in Scopus. The risk of bias, the reported measurement properties and the quality of evidence were evaluated using the COSMIN framework. The reporting follows the PRISMA 2020 statement. We identified 1200 records in the databases and 108 records during citation searching and included four studies describing three measurement instruments for DD in children and their measurement properties. We considered the content validity inconsistent for all three instruments. The study authors reported internal consistency, reliability and construct validity for one instrument. We rated the quality of evidence from very low to moderate.

(079) Evaluating Sexual Self-schema Scales for Use Among Women Who Experienced Sexual Trauma: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties and Practice Implications

Abstract Introduction “Sexual self-schema" refers to a psychological construct describing the organization of cognitive, affective, and behavioral dimensions of our understanding of ourselves as sexual beings. Sexual self-schema have been shown to mediate a variety of women’s sexual wellbeing outcomes. It is unclear the extent to which existing measurements of sexual self-schema capture aspects relevant to a sexual trauma history, such as unique patterns of dysregulated sexual excitation and inhibition. Objective This systematic review describes existing validated sexual self-schema measurements, and critically discusses each instrument in the context of assessing women who experienced sexual trauma. Methods We conducted the review according to PRISMA guidelines. We searched Academic Search Premier, Web of Science, and PsycINFO for reports focused on development and validation of assessment tools for women’s sexual self-schema. The search used pre-specified keywords (“sexual self-schema,” “sexual self-concept,” “sexual self-perception,” or “sexual self-view”). To ensure literature saturation, authors conducted reference branching on studies identified from the search via Google Scholar. Authors then screened titles, abstracts, and methods of all potentially eligible studies. Results Searches identified 576 articles, of which 455 unique articles were considered. Of these, 287 and 63 were excluded based on information in the title and abstract, respectively. Of 43 full-text articles retrieved, 20 were removed upon methods inspection. Reference list branching identified 65 additional potential articles, of which two were included. Across methods, 21 total papers were included in the final review. This presentation will present data on each measurement tool, including scope of use, sample description, measurement validation properties, and application considerations. Qualitative synthesis across papers revealed that the Sexual Self Schema Scale for Women (Andersen &amp; Cyranowski, 1994) is the most widely cited and is clearly the field standard, from which further emic versions have been developed across languages and nationalities. Further, available measures vary widely in content specificity/comprehensiveness, face validity, and response valence dimensionality. Only two papers explicitly considered elements of sexual trauma at the measurement development or validation phase. Conclusions Existing scales have limited utility in capturing unique social-relational patterns that are common among women who have experienced trauma. Further, few validated scales incorporate nuanced elements of co-occurring, conflicting approach-avoidance orientations toward sex, which suggests that measures may be limited in their ability to assess risk factors for sexual dysfunction among sexual trauma survivors. We list measurement development and validation details and relevant strengths and limitations of 21 unique, varied sexual self-schema measurement instruments for researchers and clinicians who seek to understand cognitive risk and resilience factors among women who have experienced sexual trauma. Disclosure No

Instruments to Assess Cognitive Reserve Among Older Adults: a Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.

Cognitive reserve explains the differences in the susceptibility to cognitive impairment related to brain aging, pathology, or insult. Given that cognitive reserve has important implications for the cognitive health of typically and pathologically aging older adults, research needs to identify valid and reliable instruments for measuring cognitive reserve. However, the measurement properties of current cognitive reserve instruments used in older adults have not been evaluated according to the most up-to-date COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). This systematic review aimed to critically appraise, compare, and summarize the quality of the measurement properties of all existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults. A systematic literature search was performed to identify relevant studies published up to December 2021, which was conducted by three of four researchers using 13 electronic databases and snowballing method. The COSMIN was used to assess the methodological quality of the studies and the quality of measurement properties. Out of the 11,338 retrieved studies, only seven studies that concerned five instruments were eventually included. The methodological quality of one-fourth of the included studies was doubtful and three-seventh was very good, while only four measurement properties from two instruments were supported by high-quality evidence. Overall, current studies and evidence for selecting cognitive reserve instruments suitable for older adults were insufficient. All included instruments have the potential to be recommended, while none of the identified cognitive reserve instruments for older adults appears to be generally superior to the others. Therefore, further studies are recommended to validate the measurement properties of existing cognitive reserve instruments for older adults, especially the content validity as guided by COSMIN.Systematic Review Registration numbers: CRD42022309399 (PROSPERO).

Measuring situation awareness in health care providers: a systematic review of measurement properties using COSMIN methodology

BackgroundSituation awareness (SA) is a key factor in accountability and ensuring patient safety in health care. SA is an essential element to research on human factors in healthcare. It is essential to identify valid instruments for measuring this concept and assessing how it is affected by interventions and educational methods.MethodsThis systematic review aimed to assess the measurement properties of situation awareness instruments in health care providers’ (HCPS) using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology. Four databases (Medline (through PubMed), Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science) were systematically searched. A manual search was also conducted on Google Scholar and the reference list of the included primary studies to supplement the electronic search. Studies aiming to determine the measurement properties of SA instruments or non-technical skills in HCPS were included. The overall results for each measurement property were reported as sufficient, insufficient, inconsistent, or indeterminate, and the quality of evidence was reported as high, moderate, low, or very low.ResultsA total of 25 studies and 15 instruments were included in the study. More than one measurement property was reported in some of the studies, and none of the studies presented all measurement properties. The most common measurement properties were content validity (12/25) and internal consistency (12/25). Cross‐cultural validity and responsiveness were not investigated in any study. Evidence quality for the measurement properties was not high in any of the 15 instruments.ConclusionsNone of the instruments can be recommended as the most suitable instrument, and all instruments were classified as promising instruments in need of further psychometric assessment. This systematic review proves the dire need for the development and psychometric evaluation of instruments to measure SA in HCPs in clinical settings.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020147349.

Tools for measuring client experiences and satisfaction with healthcare in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of measurement properties

BackgroundPerspectives of patients as clients on healthcare offer unique insights into the process and outcomes of care and can facilitate improvements in the quality of services. Differences in the tools used to measure these perspectives often reflect differences in the conceptualization of quality of care and personal experiences. This systematic review assesses the validity and reliability of instruments measuring client experiences and satisfaction with healthcare in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).MethodsWe performed a systematic search of studies published in PubMed, SCOPUS, and CINAHL. This review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies describing the development and psychometric properties of client experience and satisfaction with general health care were included in the review. Critical appraisal of study design was undertaken using the Appraisal tool for Cross-Sectional Studies (AXIS). The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist and Terwee’s criteria were used to appraise the psychometric properties of the included studies. A narrative synthesis approach was used in the interpretation of the findings.ResultsOf the 7470 records identified, 12 studies with 14 corresponding instruments met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. No study assessed all the psychometric properties highlighted by the COSMIN criteria. In most instruments, we found evidence that initial development work incorporated client participation. The most evaluated measurement properties were content validity, internal consistency, and structural validity. Measurement error and responsiveness were not reported in any study.ConclusionReliability and validity should be considered important elements when choosing or developing an instrument for professionals seeking an effective instrument for use within the population. Our review identified limitations in the psychometric properties of patient experience and satisfaction instruments, and none met all methodological quality standards. Future studies should focus on further developing and testing available measures for their effectiveness in clinical practice. Furthermore, the development of new instruments should incorporate clients' views and be rigorously tested or validated in studies with high methodological quality.Trial registrationCRD42020150438.

Interstitial lung diseases specific measures in exercise interventions: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Effects of exercise-based interventions (EBIs) on people with interstitial lung disease (ILD) are not yet fully understood. Reasons may include the limited use of ILD-specific measures and/or the lack of adequate information regarding their measurement properties. The purpose of this review was to summarize the ILD-specific outcome measures used in EBI studies and their measurement properties. This was a two-phase systematic review: phase 1 identified ILD-specific measures used in EBI studies; phase 2 reviewed their measurement properties. PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCO and EMBASE were searched up to March 2021. One reviewer extracted data, and 2 reviewers independently assessed studies risk of bias as well as the quality of measurement properties using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. Phase 1 identified 18 records. The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire for Interstitial Pulmonary Fibrosis (SGRQ-IPF) was the only ILD-specific outcome measure used (n=2 trials). Phase 2 resulted in 31 eligible records; measurement properties were reported for 12 measures. Measures presented sufficient content validity, internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.61-0.96), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.39; 0.96), hypothesis testing and responsiveness but were insufficient for measurement error and indeterminate for cross-cultural and structural validity. The outcome measures King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease and SGRQ-IPF had higher evidence of adequate measurement properties than other measures. Quality of the evidence was mostly very low to moderate. ILD-specific outcome measures are used infrequently in EBI trials, and there is scarce information regarding their measurement properties. CRD42018112466.

Patient reported outcome measures in childbirth and postpartum maternal quality of life: a protocol for systematic review of measurement properties.

Background: Patient centred healthcare is the corner stone to many healthcare strategies. Patient specific health needs should be at the fore of healthcare improvements and quality measurements. Patient reported outcome measures (PROM) that support real world clinical effectiveness assessments are increasingly being used to highlight domains where there is the greatest scope for change. Objectives: This systematic review aims to identify and evaluate existing patient reported assessment measures/tool(s) that can be used in developing a PROM for postpartum women. We will assess and evaluate their measurement properties in a transparent and structured way in accordance with the COSMIN guidelines. Methods: Methodological guidelines for systematic reviews of PROMs have been developed by the COSMIN initiative and will be followed for this systematic review. A systematic literature review will be performed using PubMed, CINAHL and EMBASE from inception to the present day. Two reviewers independently will judge eligibility, conduct data extraction and assess the methodological quality of each study as per COSMIN guidelines. Inclusion criteria: studies should concern PROM with an aim to evaluate measurement properties in the development or the evaluation of a PROM of interest. Included PROM will focus upon postpartum women assessing morbidity and quality of care. All peer reviewed studies with an assessment tool designed for patient completion will be considered. Exclusion criteria; abstract, letters and non-peer reviewed publications. Studies will be graded on measurement properties and quality of evidence as laid out by COSMIN. All studies and characteristics eligible for inclusion will be summarised and a recommendation to the most suitable measurement tool(s) will be given. Discussion: We will provide a comprehensive description of all available patient reported assessment tools available for childbirth and postpartum quality of life and recommend based on COSMIN guidelines the most suitable instrument(s) available for use.

Erratum to: Distance-limited walk tests post-stroke: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Erratum to: Distance-limited walk tests post-stroke: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test: A systematic review of measurement properties and COSMIN analysis.

The Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test (CARAT) is a patient‐reported outcome measurement (PROM) assessing the control of asthma and allergic rhinitis (AR) at a 4 week interval. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of CARAT. Following PRISMA and COSMIN guidelines, we searched five bibliographic databases and retrieved studies concerning the development, assessment of properties, validation, and/or cultural adaption of CARAT. The studies' methodological quality, the quality of measurement properties, and the overall quality of evidence were assessed. We performed meta‐analysis of CARAT measurement properties. We included 16 studies. Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test displayed sufficient content validity and very good consistency (meta‐analytical Cronbach alpha = 0.83; 95% CI = 0.80–0.86;I 2 = 62.6%). Control of allergic rhinitis and Asthma Test meta‐analytical intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.64–0.98;I 2 = 93.7%). It presented good construct validity, especially for correlations with Patient‐reported outcome measures assessing asthma (absolute Spearman correlation coefficients range = 0.67–0.73; moderate quality of evidence), and good responsiveness. Its minimal important difference is 3.5. Overall, CARAT has good internal consistency, reliability, construct validity and responsiveness, despite the heterogeneous quality of evidence. Control of Allergic Rhinitis and Asthma Test can be used to assess the control of asthma and AR. As first of its kind, this meta‐analysis of CARAT measurement properties sets a stronger level of evidence for asthma and/or AR control questionnaires.

Image analysis systems to calculate the surface area of vitiligo lesions: A systematic review of measurement properties.

Several digital image analysis systems have been developed for surface calculation of vitiligo lesions. Critical assessment of their measurement properties is crucial to support evidence-based recommendations on the most suitable instruments and will reveal the need for future research. A systematic review was performed to systematically summarize, compare, and critically assess the measurement properties of digital and analogue analysis systems for surface calculation of vitiligo lesions following the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) recommendations. Nineteen clinical trials were selected including 25 different instruments. Manual tracing on transparent sheets (contact planimetry) combined with digital measurement or point counting can be considered as the best validated method for the evaluation of target lesions taking into account the skin curvatures. Two-dimensional digital imaging analysis on photographs seems also robust although confirmatory data of different research groups using the same digital instrument in a wide range of skin types are missing. Analysis based on 3D photography is still in its early stage but is promising for whole-body analysis. However, the reported data on the quality of the instruments for surface area calculation of vitiligo lesions were in general rather limited. Therefore, future high-quality validation studies are required also including full body evaluations.

Quality of life instruments in atrial fibrillation: a systematic review of measurement properties

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private company. Main funding source(s): Medtronic Background Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide. A key objective of AF management is symptom reduction, as quality of life (QoL) is lower for patients with AF. QoL outcomes are important for evaluating AF therapies primarily indicated for symptom control, including catheter ablation. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the most frequently used QoL instruments across AF ablation studies and to critically appraise their measurement properties. Methods and results A literature mapping exercise was completed to identify the most frequently used QoL instruments in AF ablation studies published in the past five years. A systematic review was then undertaken to critically appraise the measurement properties of the identified QoL instruments: EQ-5D, SF-36, AFEQT (AF Effect on QualiTy-of-Life), AFSS (AF Severity Scale), MLHF-Q (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire), AFQLQ (AF Quality of Life Questionnaire), ASTA (Arrhythmia Specific questionnaire in Tachycardia and Arrhythmia), and SCL (Arrhythmia Symptom Checklist, Frequency and Severity). The systematic review was designed using the COSMIN guidelines for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measurements, and was focused on the measurement properties of validity, reliability, and responsiveness. A systematic search of the literature was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid PsycINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL. A meta-analysis was not feasible due to significant heterogeneity between studies and measurement properties, therefore results were synthesized qualitatively. 17 studies and 8 instruments were identified that met the eligibility criteria. ASTA and AFEQT had the best ratings across measurement properties with both instruments having good ratings for prom development and internal consistency. However, none of the studies assessed measurement error and cross-cultural validity. Measurement properties were inconsistent across different studies appraising the same instrument. Conclusions AFEQT and ASTA had the strongest measurement properties but not all measurement properties have been assessed. Considering the large number of indeterminate and insufficient ratings, future research should focus on cross-cultural validation, measurement error, responsiveness, and interpretability.

Devices measuring transepidermal water loss: A systematic review of measurement properties.

The objective of this review is to examine the reliability and measurement error of devices that measure transepidermal water loss (TEWL). TEWL is a physiological property of skin which increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilised measure of skin barrier integrity. Devices measuring TEWL are available as open, semi-open or closed chamber. Studies of reliability examine the consistency of measurement, and/or responsiveness whereas measurement error scores in absolute terms the amount of error due to sources of variation. Studies examining the reliability and/or measurement error of TEWL measurement devices were included. Studies that only report on measurement of TEWL outcomes without examination of reliability and/or measurement error were excluded. The search strategy aimed to locate published and unpublished studies. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, utilising identified keywords and limited to studies in English. Grey literature sources were searched to identify any unpublished documents. Study selection using the inclusion criteria was then assessed by two reviewers for methodological quality utilising the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) risk of bias tool to assess the reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments. A total of 22 devices were examined in the 38 included studies. The quality of study design was on average rated as 'Adequate' however reliability and measurement error statistical methods were on average rated as 'Doubtful'. TEWL measurement devices were found to demonstrate good reliability and frequently correlated with other devices. However, measurement error was highly variable but improves under in vitro conditions. Future research should consider risk of bias factors when designing studies.

Identification of tools used to assess the external validity of randomized controlled trials in reviews: a systematic review of measurement properties

BackgroundInternal and external validity are the most relevant components when critically appraising randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for systematic reviews. However, there is no gold standard to assess external validity. This might be related to the heterogeneity of the terminology as well as to unclear evidence of the measurement properties of available tools. The aim of this review was to identify tools to assess the external validity of RCTs. It was further, to evaluate the quality of identified tools and to recommend the use of individual tools to assess the external validity of RCTs in future systematic reviews.MethodsA two-phase systematic literature search was performed in four databases: PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO via OVID, and CINAHL via EBSCO. First, tools to assess the external validity of RCTs were identified. Second, studies investigating the measurement properties of these tools were selected. The measurement properties of each included tool were appraised using an adapted version of the COnsensus based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.Results38 publications reporting on the development or validation of 28 included tools were included. For 61% (17/28) of the included tools, there was no evidence for measurement properties. For the remaining tools, reliability was the most frequently assessed property. Reliability was judged as “sufficient” for three tools (very low certainty of evidence). Content validity was rated as “sufficient” for one tool (moderate certainty of evidence).ConclusionsBased on these results, no available tool can be fully recommended to assess the external validity of RCTs in systematic reviews. Several steps are required to overcome the identified difficulties to either adapt and validate available tools or to develop a better suitable tool.Trial registrationProspective registration at Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PTG4D.

814 Devices measuring transepidermal water loss of the skin: a systematic review of measurement properties

IntroductionTEWL is a physiological property of skin which increases when the epidermis is damaged. It is, therefore, a commonly utilised measure of skin barrier integrity. Devices measuring TEWL are available as open, semi-open or closed chamber. Studies of reliability examine the consistency of measurement, and/or responsive whereas measurement error scores in absolute terms the amount of error due to sources of variation.MethodsThe search strategy aimed to locate published and unpublished studies. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science, utilising identified keywords and limited to studies in English. Grey literature sources were searched to identify any unpublished documents. Study selection using the inclusion criteria was then assessed by two reviewers for methodological quality utilising the COSMIN risk of bias tool to assess the reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments.Studies examining the reliability and/or measurement error of TEWL measurement devices were included. Studies that only report on measurement of TEWL outcomes without examination of reliability and/or measurement error were excluded.ResultsA total of 22 devices were examined in the 38 included studies. The quality of study design was on average rated as ‘Adequate’ however reliability and measurement error statistical methods were on average rated as ‘Doubtful’.ConclusionsTEWL measurement devices were found to demonstrate good reliability and often correlated with other devices. However, measurement error was highly variable but improves under in-vitro conditions.

Balance Function in Patients With COPD: A Systematic Review of Measurement Properties.

To conduct an overview, evaluation, and synthesis of measurement properties of instruments assessing balance of COPD patients. Electronic searches were performed in Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, WanFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases up to the end of April 2021. Two reviewers independently evaluated the methodological quality using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instrument checklist, and rated the overall quality level of evidence was graded based upon a modified Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Finally, 12 instruments were included. The Berg Balance Scale and the Timed Up and Go test were the most frequently used tools to evaluate balance. None of 12 instruments provide any information regarding cross-cultural validation or criterion validation. High-quality studies exploring measurement properties with a focus on the criterion validity and cross-cultural validity of balance measurements in COPD patients are warranted.

Women empowerment in reproductive health: a systematic review of measurement properties

IntroductionThere is a considerable dearth of official metrics for women empowerment, which is pivotal to observe universal progress towards Sustainable Development Goals 5, targeting "achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.” This study aimed to introduce, critically appraise, and summarize the measurement properties of women empowerment scales in sexual and reproductive health.MethodsA comprehensive systematic literature search through several international electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, ProQuest, and Science Direct was performed on September 2020, without a time limit. All studies aimed to develop and validate a measurement of women empowerment in sexual and reproductive health were included. The quality assessment was performed through a rating scale addressing the six criteria, including: a priori explicit theoretical framework, evaluating content validity, internal consistency, and factor analysis to assess structural validity.ResultsOf 5234 identified studies, fifteen were included. The majority of the studies were conducted in the United States. All studies but one used a standardized measure. Total items of each scale ranged from 8 to 23. The most common domains investigated were decision-making, freedom of coercion, and communication with the partner. Four studies did not use any conceptual framework. The individual agency followed by immediate relational agency were the main focus of included studies. Of the included studies, seven applied either literature review, expert panels, or empirical methods to develop the item pool. Cronbach's alpha coefficient reported in nine studies ranged from α = 0.56 to 0.87. Most of the studies but three lack reporting test–retest reliability ranging r = 0.69–0.87. Nine studies proved content validity. Six criteria were applied to scoring the scales, by which nine of fifteen articles were rated as medium quality, two rated as poor quality, and four rated as high quality.ConclusionMost scales assessed various types of validity and Internal consistency for the reliability. Applying a theoretical framework, more rigorous validation of scales, and assessing the various dimensions of women empowerment in diverse contexts and different levels, namely structural agency, are needed to develop effective and representing scales.