A COSMIN systematic review of generic patient-reported outcome measures in Switzerland.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Thanh Elsener, Matthew Kerry, Nikola Biller-Andorno
{"title":"A COSMIN systematic review of generic patient-reported outcome measures in Switzerland.","authors":"Thanh Elsener, Matthew Kerry, Nikola Biller-Andorno","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03942-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To conduct a systematic review of the quality of generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for clinical or population research or practice using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to derive recommendations for usage of generic PROMs within Switzerland.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane) and grey literature in Switzerland to identify studies reporting on the development or validation of any generic PROMs used in Switzerland. Methodological quality of each study was assessed with COSMIN's Risk of Bias Checklist. Measurement property evidence (content validity and psychometrics) was further evaluated according to COSMIN's criteria for good measurement properties. Overall evidence was synthesized according to COSMIN's modified GRADE approach to generate recommendations for future use or disuse of generic PROMs within Switzerland.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from k = 49 studies reporting on five PROMs (EQ-5D, SF-36, PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, WORQ) were included. Among these, the SF-36 can be recommended for use. The PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, and WORQ have the potential to be recommended for use, but require further validation. The EQ-5D is not recommendable for future use.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With a limited number of content validity studies, WHOQOL-BREF showed sufficiency with moderate quality, while other PROMs showed mixed quality ranging from very low to moderate. Synthesizing all measurement property evidence, SF-36 was identified as recommendable. PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, and WORQ were identified as potentially recommendable pending further validation evidence. The EQ-5D was identified as unrecommendable for future use within Switzerland.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","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/s11136-025-03942-x","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 conduct a systematic review of the quality of generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for clinical or population research or practice using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology, and to derive recommendations for usage of generic PROMs within Switzerland.

Methods: We searched six databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane) and grey literature in Switzerland to identify studies reporting on the development or validation of any generic PROMs used in Switzerland. Methodological quality of each study was assessed with COSMIN's Risk of Bias Checklist. Measurement property evidence (content validity and psychometrics) was further evaluated according to COSMIN's criteria for good measurement properties. Overall evidence was synthesized according to COSMIN's modified GRADE approach to generate recommendations for future use or disuse of generic PROMs within Switzerland.

Results: Data from k = 49 studies reporting on five PROMs (EQ-5D, SF-36, PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, WORQ) were included. Among these, the SF-36 can be recommended for use. The PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, and WORQ have the potential to be recommended for use, but require further validation. The EQ-5D is not recommendable for future use.

Conclusion: With a limited number of content validity studies, WHOQOL-BREF showed sufficiency with moderate quality, while other PROMs showed mixed quality ranging from very low to moderate. Synthesizing all measurement property evidence, SF-36 was identified as recommendable. PROMIS-29, WHOQOL-BREF, and WORQ were identified as potentially recommendable pending further validation evidence. The EQ-5D was identified as unrecommendable for future use within Switzerland.

COSMIN 对瑞士通用患者报告结果测量方法的系统回顾。
目的:采用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)方法,对临床或人口研究或实践的通用患者报告结果测量(PROMs)的质量进行系统审查,并得出在瑞士使用通用PROMs的建议。方法:我们检索了瑞士的六个数据库(PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Cochrane)和灰色文献,以确定瑞士使用的任何通用prom的开发或验证的研究报告。采用COSMIN的偏倚风险检查表对每项研究的方法学质量进行评估。测量属性证据(内容效度和心理测量学)根据COSMIN的良好测量属性标准进一步评估。根据COSMIN修改后的GRADE方法综合了总体证据,以生成瑞士境内未来使用或废弃通用prom的建议。结果:数据来自k = 49项研究,报告了5个PROMs (EQ-5D、SF-36、promisl -29、WHOQOL-BREF、WORQ)。其中,SF-36可以推荐使用。promise -29、WHOQOL-BREF和WORQ具有推荐使用的潜力,但需要进一步验证。EQ-5D不建议将来使用。结论:WHOQOL-BREF在内容效度研究数量有限的情况下,表现为充分性,质量中等,其他PROMs质量好坏参半,从极低到中等。综合所有测量性能证据,SF-36被确定为推荐使用。承诺-29、WHOQOL-BREF和WORQ被确定为潜在的推荐,有待进一步的验证证据。EQ-5D被确定为不推荐将来在瑞士使用。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信