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

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Quality of Life Research Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1007/s11136-024-03634-y
Ellen B M Elsman, Lidwine B Mokkink, Caroline B Terwee, Dorcas Beaton, Joel J Gagnier, Andrea C Tricco, Ami Baba, Nancy J Butcher, Maureen Smith, Catherine Hofstetter, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Anna Berardi, Julie Farmer, Kirstie L Haywood, Karolin R Krause, Sarah Markham, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Ava Mehdipour, Juanna Ricketts, Peter Szatmari, Zahi Touma, David Moher, Martin Offringa
{"title":"Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.","authors":"Ellen B M Elsman, Lidwine B Mokkink, Caroline B Terwee, Dorcas Beaton, Joel J Gagnier, Andrea C Tricco, Ami Baba, Nancy J Butcher, Maureen Smith, Catherine Hofstetter, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Anna Berardi, Julie Farmer, Kirstie L Haywood, Karolin R Krause, Sarah Markham, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Ava Mehdipour, Juanna Ricketts, Peter Szatmari, Zahi Touma, David Moher, Martin Offringa","doi":"10.1007/s11136-024-03634-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although 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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PRISMA-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. NOTE: In 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.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11286641/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03634-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Although 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.

Methods: The 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.

Results: From 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.

Conclusion: PRISMA-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. NOTE: In 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.

结果测量工具 (OMI) 系统综述报告指南:用于 OMIs 的 PRISMA-COSMIN 2024。
目的:尽管关于如何对结果测量工具(OMIs)进行系统综述的指南已经全面普及,例如 COSMIN(基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准)倡议,但已发表的报告中往往缺少关键信息。本文介绍了系统综述和元分析首选报告项目 (PRISMA) 2020 指南的扩展:方法:方法:开发过程遵循 "提高健康研究的质量和透明度(EQUATOR)"指南,包括文献检索、专家咨询、德尔菲研究、混合工作组会议、试点测试和项目结束会议,患者/公众也参与其中:结果:从文献和专家咨询中确定了 49 个可能相关的报告项目。德尔菲研究的第一轮由 103 名专家组成员完成,第二轮和第三轮由 78 名专家组成员完成。经过三轮研究,就 44 个项目的纳入和措辞达成了一致意见(≥ 67%)。在有 24 人参加的工作组会议上讨论了 11 个未就纳入和/或措辞达成共识的项目。会议就 10 个项目的纳入和措辞达成了一致意见,并删除了 1 个项目。与 65 位 OMI 系统性综述的作者进行了试点测试,通过对措辞和结构的细微改动进一步完善了指南,并在项目结束会议上最终定稿。促进完整系统综述报告报告的最终核对表包含 54 个(子)项目,涉及综述的标题、摘要、通俗语言摘要、开放科学、引言、方法、结果和讨论。与标题和摘要有关的 13 个项目也包含在单独的摘要核对表中,为作者报告会议摘要等提供指导:2024年开放媒介的PRISMA-COSMIN包括两份核对表(报告全文;摘要)、相应的解释和阐述文件(详细说明每个项目的原理和示例)以及数据流图。用于 OMIs 2024 的 PRISMA-COSMIN 可改进 OMIs 系统性综述的报告,促进其可重复性,使最终用户能够评估 OMIs 的质量,并为特定应用选择最合适的 OMI。注:为鼓励其广泛传播,本文可在以下期刊的网站上免费获取:健康与生活质量结果》、《临床流行病学杂志》、《患者报告结果杂志》、《生活质量研究》。
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
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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