Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for women with dysmenorrhea: A systematic review.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Journal of Clinical Nursing Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-26 DOI:10.1111/jocn.17293
Guilherme Tavares de Arruda, Patricia Driusso, Amanda Garcia de Godoy, Ana Paula de Sousa, Mariana Arias Avila
{"title":"Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for women with dysmenorrhea: A systematic review.","authors":"Guilherme Tavares de Arruda, Patricia Driusso, Amanda Garcia de Godoy, Ana Paula de Sousa, Mariana Arias Avila","doi":"10.1111/jocn.17293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and critically appraise the available evidence for the measurement properties of specific patient-reported outcome measures used for dysmenorrhea.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>Not applicable as this is a systematic review.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO protocol: CRD42021244410. Registration on April 22, 2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.17293","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

针对痛经妇女的患者报告结果测量指标的测量特性:系统综述。
背景:痛经是一种主观感受,只能通过患者报告的结果进行评估。目的:对用于痛经的特定患者报告结果测量方法的测量特性的现有证据进行鉴定和批判性评估:方法:采用 PRISMA 声明报告本系统性综述。检索的数据库包括 PubMed、SCOPUS、CINAHL、Web of Science、ScienceDirect 和 Google Scholar(2021 年 4 月;2023 年 2 月更新)。原始研究的主要数据收集、语言和出版日期不限,这些研究报告了一种或多种与痛经相关的患者报告结果测量的心理测量特性。文献检索、研究筛选、数据提取和偏倚风险评估由两名审稿人独立完成,并遵循 COSMIN 指南:本综述分析了 30 项研究,评估了 19 项患者报告的结果指标。这些工具在测量结构和测量特性(有效性、可靠性和响应性)方面各不相同。研究的方法质量和患者报告结果测量的证据质量也各不相同。在13项报告了患者报告结果测量方法的研究中,大多数研究的方法学质量不高,总体评价不充分或不一致:结论:痛经症状干扰(DSI)量表是唯一一种已确定的患者报告结果测量方法,因其评分充分,内容效度证据质量中等,有推荐使用的潜力。未来的研究应进一步评估现有患者报告结果测量方法的测量特性,或按照 COSMIN 方法开发新的患者报告结果测量方法:患者或公众贡献:不适用,因为这是一篇系统性综述:试验注册:PROSPERO 协议:CRD42021244410。注册日期:2021 年 4 月 22 日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.40%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice. JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice. We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信