Psychometric properties, and cultural appropriateness, of patient reported outcome measures for use in primary healthcare: a scoping review.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Christopher M Doran, Jamie Bryant, Erika Langham, Roxanne Bainbridge, Anthony Shakeshaft, Breanne Hobden, Sara Farnbach, Megan Freund
{"title":"Psychometric properties, and cultural appropriateness, of patient reported outcome measures for use in primary healthcare: a scoping review.","authors":"Christopher M Doran, Jamie Bryant, Erika Langham, Roxanne Bainbridge, Anthony Shakeshaft, Breanne Hobden, Sara Farnbach, Megan Freund","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03956-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To critically appraise the psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness of self-reported generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) applicable for use in the primary healthcare setting using the Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PROMs were identified via a published systematic review and searches of relevant websites. PROMs were included if they were generic (i.e., outcome measures that assessed general aspects of health); had a maximum of 30 items; were applicable for use by all adult primary care patients; and were validated in English. Data was extracted regarding the characteristics of each PROM and the characteristics of included validation studies. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist was used to assess methodological quality and the revised COSMIN criteria was used to assess measurement properties. An evidence synthesis was conducted across studies using the guidelines from the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for systematic reviews of clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>399 PROMs were identified and 19 met inclusion criteria. The included PROMs measured general health related quality of life (n = 8), outcomes or impact of care (n = 3), patient enablement, activation, and empowerment (n = 3), quality of care (n = 3), health and disability (n = 1), and functional status (n = 1). Six PROMs met the recommended COSMIN threshold for implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although six PROMs can be recommended for use in primary care, further psychometric testing is still required to strengthen evidence related to internal consistency, responsiveness and cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance. Selection of a PROM for routine clinical use in primary care also needs to be guided by the patient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","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/s11136-025-03956-5","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 critically appraise the psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness of self-reported generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) applicable for use in the primary healthcare setting using the Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

Methods: PROMs were identified via a published systematic review and searches of relevant websites. PROMs were included if they were generic (i.e., outcome measures that assessed general aspects of health); had a maximum of 30 items; were applicable for use by all adult primary care patients; and were validated in English. Data was extracted regarding the characteristics of each PROM and the characteristics of included validation studies. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist was used to assess methodological quality and the revised COSMIN criteria was used to assess measurement properties. An evidence synthesis was conducted across studies using the guidelines from the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for systematic reviews of clinical trials.

Results: 399 PROMs were identified and 19 met inclusion criteria. The included PROMs measured general health related quality of life (n = 8), outcomes or impact of care (n = 3), patient enablement, activation, and empowerment (n = 3), quality of care (n = 3), health and disability (n = 1), and functional status (n = 1). Six PROMs met the recommended COSMIN threshold for implementation.

Conclusion: Although six PROMs can be recommended for use in primary care, further psychometric testing is still required to strengthen evidence related to internal consistency, responsiveness and cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance. Selection of a PROM for routine clinical use in primary care also needs to be guided by the patient population.

用于初级医疗保健的患者报告结果测量的心理计量特性和文化适宜性:范围综述。
目的:根据基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)指南,对适用于初级医疗保健环境中的患者自述通用结果测量(PROMs)的心理测量特性和文化适宜性进行严格评估:通过已发表的系统综述和搜索相关网站来确定 PROM。如果PROM是通用的(即评估健康一般方面的结果测量);最多有30个项目;适用于所有成人初级保健患者;并经过英语验证,则可纳入PROM。我们提取了有关每个 PROM 的特征以及纳入的验证研究特征的数据。COSMIN偏倚风险清单用于评估方法学质量,修订后的COSMIN标准用于评估测量特性。根据修改后的临床试验系统综述推荐分级评估、发展和评价方法的指导原则,对各项研究进行了证据综合:结果:共确定了 399 项 PROM,其中 19 项符合纳入标准。纳入的 PROMs 衡量了与健康相关的一般生活质量(n = 8)、护理结果或影响(n = 3)、患者能力、激活和授权(n = 3)、护理质量(n = 3)、健康和残疾(n = 1)以及功能状态(n = 1)。六项 PROM 达到了 COSMIN 推荐的实施阈值:尽管有六种 PROM 可推荐用于初级医疗,但仍需进行进一步的心理测试,以加强与内部一致性、响应性和跨文化有效性/测量不变性相关的证据。在选择用于初级医疗常规临床使用的 PROM 时,还需要以患者群体为导向。
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