Communication Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Adults With Communication Disorders: A Systematic Review of Content Validity

IF 2.1 3区医学 Q2 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY

International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders Pub Date : 2025-05-12 DOI:10.1111/1460-6984.70050

Lizet Van Ewijk, Katerina Hilari, Analisa Pais, Anna Volkmer

{"title":"Communication Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Adults With Communication Disorders: A Systematic Review of Content Validity","authors":"Lizet Van Ewijk, Katerina Hilari, Analisa Pais, Anna Volkmer","doi":"10.1111/1460-6984.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Content validity is a key measurement property that should be considered when selecting or reviewing a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). In the field of communication disorders, there are several PROMs available, most of which are disease specific. It is unknown what the quality of the content validity of these PROMs is.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aims</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of existing communication PROMs used with adults with communication disorders.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This study evaluated PROMs drawn from a previously published systematic literature review. Of 31 measures, 25 measures were included in this review, covering a range of communication-related constructs in different communication disorders. The process of rating followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs. There were three stages to the evaluation process comprising Step 1: evaluating the quality of the PROM development, Step 2: evaluating the quality of content validity studies on the PROM (if available) and Step 3: evaluating the content validity of the PROM overall, based on the quality and results of the available studies and the PROM itself.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Step 1: With regards to the quality of the PROM development, 21 of 25 PROMs were rated as inadequate. Step 2: Content validity studies were available for five of the PROMs. All of these studies were rated doubtful or inadequate. Step 3: The quality of the available evidence on content validity of the included PROMs was overall very low. Only the evidence on the content validity of the Communication Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and the Neuro-QoL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) was rated as of moderate quality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Results of this study highlight the scarcity of high-quality evidence on the development and content validity of PROMs that aim to capture the construct of communication. This review is a call to action for future PROMs to include both the target population and professionals in development and content validity testing, using rigorous methodology in the process.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS</h3>\n \n <div><i>What is already known on this subject</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>There are several patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available for adult communication disorders. Many of these PROMs have been assessed on one or more psychometric properties, typically reliability and validity aspects. Content validity is often overlooked in research.</li>\n </ul><i>What this study adds</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>Clinimetric and psychometric experts recommend content validity as the first and most important measurement property to consider when selecting a scale. This study is the first to provide a systematic assessment of the quality of content validity of communication PROMs used in adult communication disorders.</li>\n </ul><i>What are the potential or clinical implications of this work?</i>\n \n <ul>\n \n <li>Using measures with good content validity during outcome measurement ensures that researchers and clinicians capture constructs that are relevant and important to clients. It also ensures that the measures used are accessible to the clients and comprehensively address their needs.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49182,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","volume":"60 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1460-6984.70050","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1460-6984.70050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Content validity is a key measurement property that should be considered when selecting or reviewing a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). In the field of communication disorders, there are several PROMs available, most of which are disease specific. It is unknown what the quality of the content validity of these PROMs is.

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate the content validity of existing communication PROMs used with adults with communication disorders.

Methods

This study evaluated PROMs drawn from a previously published systematic literature review. Of 31 measures, 25 measures were included in this review, covering a range of communication-related constructs in different communication disorders. The process of rating followed the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs. There were three stages to the evaluation process comprising Step 1: evaluating the quality of the PROM development, Step 2: evaluating the quality of content validity studies on the PROM (if available) and Step 3: evaluating the content validity of the PROM overall, based on the quality and results of the available studies and the PROM itself.

Main Contribution

Step 1: With regards to the quality of the PROM development, 21 of 25 PROMs were rated as inadequate. Step 2: Content validity studies were available for five of the PROMs. All of these studies were rated doubtful or inadequate. Step 3: The quality of the available evidence on content validity of the included PROMs was overall very low. Only the evidence on the content validity of the Communication Participation Item Bank (CPIB) and the Neuro-QoL (Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders) was rated as of moderate quality.

Conclusions

Results of this study highlight the scarcity of high-quality evidence on the development and content validity of PROMs that aim to capture the construct of communication. This review is a call to action for future PROMs to include both the target population and professionals in development and content validity testing, using rigorous methodology in the process.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject

There are several patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) available for adult communication disorders. Many of these PROMs have been assessed on one or more psychometric properties, typically reliability and validity aspects. Content validity is often overlooked in research.

What this study adds

Clinimetric and psychometric experts recommend content validity as the first and most important measurement property to consider when selecting a scale. This study is the first to provide a systematic assessment of the quality of content validity of communication PROMs used in adult communication disorders.

What are the potential or clinical implications of this work?

Using measures with good content validity during outcome measurement ensures that researchers and clinicians capture constructs that are relevant and important to clients. It also ensures that the measures used are accessible to the clients and comprehensively address their needs.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

成人沟通障碍患者报告的结果测量：内容效度的系统回顾

内容效度是选择或审查患者报告结果测量（PROM）时应考虑的关键测量属性。在沟通障碍领域，有几种可用的PROMs，其中大多数是疾病特异性的。目前尚不清楚这些prom的内容效度质量如何。目的探讨成人沟通障碍患者现有的沟通问卷的内容效度。方法本研究评估了从先前发表的系统文献综述中提取的prom。在31项测量中，本综述包括25项测量，涵盖了不同沟通障碍的一系列沟通相关构念。评定过程采用基于协商一致意见的卫生计量器具选择标准（COSMIN）方法，对卫生计量器具的内容效度进行评估。评估过程有三个阶段，包括步骤1：评估PROM开发的质量，步骤2：评估PROM（如果可用）的内容效度研究的质量，步骤3：基于可用研究和PROM本身的质量和结果，评估PROM的整体内容效度。主要贡献步骤1：关于PROM开发的质量，25个PROM中有21个被评为不足。步骤2：内容效度研究可用于五个prom。所有这些研究都被评为可疑或不充分。步骤3：所包括的prom的内容效度的现有证据的质量总体上非常低。只有交流参与项目库（CPIB）和神经系统疾病生活质量（neuroqol）的内容效度证据被评为中等质量。结论：本研究的结果强调了旨在捕捉沟通结构的prom的开发和内容效度的高质量证据的稀缺性。这一审查是对未来的prom采取行动的呼吁，在开发和内容有效性测试中包括目标人群和专业人员，在过程中使用严格的方法。这篇论文补充了什么关于这一主题的已知情况有几种患者报告的结果测量（PROMs）可用于成人沟通障碍。许多这些prom已经在一个或多个心理测量特性上进行了评估，通常是信度和效度方面。内容效度在研究中经常被忽视。临床测量学和心理测量学专家建议，在选择量表时，首先要考虑内容效度，这是最重要的测量属性。本研究首次对成人沟通障碍中使用的沟通prom的内容效度质量进行了系统的评估。这项工作的潜在或临床意义是什么？在结果测量中使用具有良好内容效度的测量可确保研究人员和临床医生捕获与客户相关且重要的结构。它还确保所使用的措施可供客户使用，并全面解决他们的需求。

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

International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-REHABILITATION

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

12.50%

发文量

116

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： The International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders (IJLCD) is the official journal of the Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists. The Journal welcomes submissions on all aspects of speech, language, communication disorders and speech and language therapy. It provides a forum for the exchange of information and discussion of issues of clinical or theoretical relevance in the above areas.