Psychometric properties of self-reported measures of psychological birth trauma in puerperae: A COSMIN systematic review.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Pingping Chen, Chao Zhang, Guangjian Liu, Hongxia Zuo, Menghe Wang, Xiaoyan Shi, Longti Li
{"title":"Psychometric properties of self-reported measures of psychological birth trauma in puerperae: A COSMIN systematic review.","authors":"Pingping Chen, Chao Zhang, Guangjian Liu, Hongxia Zuo, Menghe Wang, Xiaoyan Shi, Longti Li","doi":"10.1007/s11136-024-03811-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of available patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of psychological birth trauma (PBT) in postpartum women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A literature search was carried out across eight databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals-covering studies published from the inception of each database up to 21 May 2024. English and Chinese language studies employing any research design and reporting at least one psychometric property of PBT in puerperae were included. Independent reviewers extracted data and followed the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to evaluate three aspects of the included instruments: methodological quality, psychometric properties, and level of evidence assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-one studies with twelve PROMs were included, measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and responsiveness were not reported for most PROMs. Nine PROMs received a Class B recommendation, based on their measurement attribute ratings and overall evidence quality. In contrast, the CTI, IES-R, and PBTAS with high-quality evidence for insufficient measurement properties, so received a Class C recommendation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This systematic review provisionally recommends the City BiTS as credible tool for assessing PBT in both clinical practice and research involving puerperae. However, further comprehensive studies are needed to conduct more comprehensive validations of the psychometric properties of existing PROMs.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-024-03811-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of available patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of psychological birth trauma (PBT) in postpartum women.

Methods: A literature search was carried out across eight databases-PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals-covering studies published from the inception of each database up to 21 May 2024. English and Chinese language studies employing any research design and reporting at least one psychometric property of PBT in puerperae were included. Independent reviewers extracted data and followed the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to evaluate three aspects of the included instruments: methodological quality, psychometric properties, and level of evidence assessed using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework.

Results: Thirty-one studies with twelve PROMs were included, measurement error, cross-cultural validity, and responsiveness were not reported for most PROMs. Nine PROMs received a Class B recommendation, based on their measurement attribute ratings and overall evidence quality. In contrast, the CTI, IES-R, and PBTAS with high-quality evidence for insufficient measurement properties, so received a Class C recommendation.

Conclusions: This systematic review provisionally recommends the City BiTS as credible tool for assessing PBT in both clinical practice and research involving puerperae. However, further comprehensive studies are needed to conduct more comprehensive validations of the psychometric properties of existing PROMs.

产褥期心理创伤自我报告测量的心理计量特性:COSMIN 系统回顾。
目的:确定并评估现有患者报告的产后妇女分娩心理创伤(PBT)结局测量指标(PROMs)的心理测量特性:方法:我们在八个数据库(PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、CINAHL、PsycINFO、中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)、万方数据库和中国科技期刊要目数据库)中进行了文献检索,涵盖了从每个数据库建立之初到 2024 年 5 月 21 日发表的研究。纳入的中英文研究均采用任何研究设计,并至少报告了一项产褥期 PBT 的心理测量学特性。独立审稿人提取数据,并遵循基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)指南,对纳入工具的三个方面进行评估:方法学质量、心理测量学特性,以及使用修改后的建议评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)框架评估的证据水平:结果:共纳入了 31 项研究和 12 个 PROM,大多数 PROM 均未报告测量误差、跨文化有效性和响应性。根据测量属性评级和总体证据质量,九项 PROM 获得了 B 级推荐。相比之下,CTI、IES-R 和 PBTAS 具有高质量证据,但测量属性不足,因此获得了 C 级推荐:本系统综述暂时推荐城市生物测量系统作为评估 PBT 的可靠工具,用于涉及产褥期妇女的临床实践和研究。不过,还需要进一步开展综合研究,对现有 PROM 的心理测量特性进行更全面的验证。
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.
×
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