Protocol for a systematic review evaluating psychometric properties and gender-related measurement (non)invariance of self-report assessment tools for autism in adults.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Nora Uglik-Marucha, David Mason, Hannah Belcher, Francesca Happé, Silia Vitoratou
{"title":"Protocol for a systematic review evaluating psychometric properties and gender-related measurement (non)invariance of self-report assessment tools for autism in adults.","authors":"Nora Uglik-Marucha, David Mason, Hannah Belcher, Francesca Happé, Silia Vitoratou","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02604-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Given the recent evidence on gender differences in the presentation of autism, there is an increasing concern that current tools for autism do not adequately capture traits more often found in women. If tools for autism measure autistic traits differently based on gender alone, their validity may be compromised as they may not be measuring the same construct across genders. Measurement invariance investigations of autism measures can help assess the validity of autism constructs for different genders. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and critically appraise the psychometric properties of all self-report tools for autism in adults that meet two criteria: (a) they have been published since or included in the NICE (2014) recommendations, and (b) they have undergone gender-related measurement invariance investigations as part of their validation process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search of electronic databases will be conducted from 2014 until the present using MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO using predefined search terms to identify eligible studies. The search for grey literature will include sources such as OpenGrey, APA PsycEXTRA, and Scopus. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility. The references of included studies will be searched for additional records. The methodological quality of the studies will be evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, while psychometric quality of findings will be assessed based on criteria for good measurement properties and ConPsy checklist. The quality of the total body of evidence will be appraised using the approach outlined in the modified GRADE guidelines.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This systematic review will be among the first to assess the psychometric properties and gender-related measurement invariance of self-reported measures for autism in adults that were published since (or included in) NICE (2014) guidelines. The review will provide recommendations for the most suitable tool to assess for autism without gender bias. If no such measure is found, it will identify existing tools with promising psychometric properties that require further testing, or suggest developing a new measure.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The registration number is CRD42023429350.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"188"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11264752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02604-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Given the recent evidence on gender differences in the presentation of autism, there is an increasing concern that current tools for autism do not adequately capture traits more often found in women. If tools for autism measure autistic traits differently based on gender alone, their validity may be compromised as they may not be measuring the same construct across genders. Measurement invariance investigations of autism measures can help assess the validity of autism constructs for different genders. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and critically appraise the psychometric properties of all self-report tools for autism in adults that meet two criteria: (a) they have been published since or included in the NICE (2014) recommendations, and (b) they have undergone gender-related measurement invariance investigations as part of their validation process.

Methods: A search of electronic databases will be conducted from 2014 until the present using MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO using predefined search terms to identify eligible studies. The search for grey literature will include sources such as OpenGrey, APA PsycEXTRA, and Scopus. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts for eligibility. The references of included studies will be searched for additional records. The methodological quality of the studies will be evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, while psychometric quality of findings will be assessed based on criteria for good measurement properties and ConPsy checklist. The quality of the total body of evidence will be appraised using the approach outlined in the modified GRADE guidelines.

Discussion: This systematic review will be among the first to assess the psychometric properties and gender-related measurement invariance of self-reported measures for autism in adults that were published since (or included in) NICE (2014) guidelines. The review will provide recommendations for the most suitable tool to assess for autism without gender bias. If no such measure is found, it will identify existing tools with promising psychometric properties that require further testing, or suggest developing a new measure.

Systematic review registration: The protocol has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). The registration number is CRD42023429350.

对成人自闭症自我报告评估工具的心理测量特性和与性别相关的测量(非)不变性进行评估的系统性回顾协议。
背景:鉴于最近有证据表明自闭症的表现形式存在性别差异,人们越来越担心目前的自闭症工具不能充分反映女性更常见的特征。如果自闭症工具仅根据性别来测量不同的自闭症特征,其有效性可能会受到影响,因为这些工具测量的可能不是不同性别的相同结构。自闭症测量工具的测量不变性调查有助于评估不同性别自闭症构建的有效性。本系统性综述旨在确定并严格评估符合以下两个标准的所有成人自闭症自我报告工具的心理测量特性:(a) 自 NICE(2014 年)建议发布以来已发布或已纳入 NICE(2014 年)建议;(b) 作为验证过程的一部分,已进行与性别相关的测量不变性调查:将使用 MEDLINE、Embase 和 PsycINFO 对 2014 年至今的电子数据库进行检索,使用预定义的检索词来确定符合条件的研究。灰色文献的搜索将包括 OpenGrey、APA PsycEXTRA 和 Scopus 等来源。两名审稿人将独立筛选符合条件的标题、摘要和全文。此外,还将检索已纳入研究的参考文献,以获取更多记录。研究的方法学质量将使用 COSMIN 偏倚风险检查表进行评估,而研究结果的心理测量学质量将根据良好测量特性标准和 ConPsy 检查表进行评估。全部证据的质量将采用修改后的 GRADE 指南中概述的方法进行评估:本系统性综述将首次评估自 NICE(2014 年)指南发布以来(或纳入其中)发布的成人自闭症自我报告测量方法的心理测量特性和与性别相关的测量不变性。审查将为最合适的自闭症评估工具提供建议,以避免性别偏见。如果没有找到这样的测量方法,则将确定需要进一步测试的具有良好心理测量特性的现有工具,或建议开发一种新的测量方法:本方案已在国际系统综述前瞻性注册中心(PROSPERO)注册。注册号为 CRD42023429350。
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
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
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