Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures to assess premenstrual syndrome/premenstrual dysphoric disorder in japanese: a systematic review using the COSMIN methodology.

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Kaori Tsuyuki, Miho Egawa, Takuma Ohsuga, Yumie Ikeda, Yoshitake Takebayashi, Hideki Sato, Masaki Mandai
{"title":"Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures to assess premenstrual syndrome/premenstrual dysphoric disorder in japanese: a systematic review using the COSMIN methodology.","authors":"Kaori Tsuyuki, Miho Egawa, Takuma Ohsuga, Yumie Ikeda, Yoshitake Takebayashi, Hideki Sato, Masaki Mandai","doi":"10.1186/s41687-025-00910-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for assessing premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) to effectively capture subjective symptom burden and evaluate treatment effectiveness in clinical and research settings. This systematic review evaluated the psychometric properties of PROMs used to assess PMS/PMDD in Japan.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology was used to assess the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included PROMs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 studies that evaluated 12 versions of 11 unique PROMs were included. PROMs were categorized as recall-based (n = 9, 69%) or daily recording scales (n = 4, 31%). The structural validity and internal consistency were relatively well evaluated for most scales. However, evidence was limited for other measurement properties such as reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity. None of the scales reported all psychometric properties outlined by COSMIN. The New Short-Form of the Premenstrual Symptoms Questionnaire and the Japanese version of the Daily Record of Severity of Problems demonstrated sufficient structural validity and internal consistency, although the quality of evidence for other properties was indeterminate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although some PROMs demonstrated promising psychometric properties, further validation studies are required for most scales. The development of innovative scales with robust measurement properties is essential for advancing the assessment of PMS/PMDD in Japanese clinical and research settings. Careful consideration of the characteristics of each PROM is necessary when selecting instruments for specific purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":"9 1","pages":"71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12181441/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00910-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important for assessing premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD) to effectively capture subjective symptom burden and evaluate treatment effectiveness in clinical and research settings. This systematic review evaluated the psychometric properties of PROMs used to assess PMS/PMDD in Japan.

Methodology: A systematic literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web databases. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology was used to assess the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included PROMs.

Results: A total of 13 studies that evaluated 12 versions of 11 unique PROMs were included. PROMs were categorized as recall-based (n = 9, 69%) or daily recording scales (n = 4, 31%). The structural validity and internal consistency were relatively well evaluated for most scales. However, evidence was limited for other measurement properties such as reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity. None of the scales reported all psychometric properties outlined by COSMIN. The New Short-Form of the Premenstrual Symptoms Questionnaire and the Japanese version of the Daily Record of Severity of Problems demonstrated sufficient structural validity and internal consistency, although the quality of evidence for other properties was indeterminate.

Conclusions: Although some PROMs demonstrated promising psychometric properties, further validation studies are required for most scales. The development of innovative scales with robust measurement properties is essential for advancing the assessment of PMS/PMDD in Japanese clinical and research settings. Careful consideration of the characteristics of each PROM is necessary when selecting instruments for specific purposes.

日本经前综合征/经前焦虑症患者报告结果测量的心理测量特性:使用COSMIN方法的系统评价
背景:患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)对于评估经前综合征(PMS)和经前烦躁障碍(PMDD)非常重要,可以有效地捕捉主观症状负担并评估临床和研究环境中的治疗效果。本系统综述评估了日本用于评估经前症候群/经前不悦症的PROMs的心理测量特性。方法:在MEDLINE、CINAHL、Cochrane Library和Ichushi-Web数据库中进行系统的文献检索。采用基于共识的卫生计量仪器选择标准(COSMIN)方法学评估纳入的计量仪器的方法学质量和计量特性。结果:共纳入13项研究,评估了11种独特的prom的12个版本。prom被归类为基于回忆(n = 9,69%)或每日记录量表(n = 4,31%)。大多数量表的结构效度和内部一致性评价相对较好。然而,证据是有限的其他测量属性,如信度,标准效度和结构效度。没有一个量表报告了COSMIN列出的所有心理测量特征。经前症状问卷新简表和日文版问题严重程度每日记录显示出足够的结构效度和内部一致性,尽管其他特性的证据质量尚不确定。结论:虽然一些PROMs显示出有希望的心理测量特性,但大多数量表需要进一步的验证研究。开发具有可靠测量特性的创新量表对于推进日本临床和研究环境中经前症候群/经前不悦症的评估至关重要。在为特定目的选择仪器时,必须仔细考虑每个PROM的特性。
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
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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