Xue Li PhD , Rui Li MSc , Meixuan Li MSc , Xu Hui MSc , Jing Li MSc , Liang Yao PhD , Harriette Van Spall MD, MPH , Kun Zhao PhD , Qiang Fu PhD , Feng Xie PhD
{"title":"心血管疾病特定健康相关生活质量工具的系统回顾与质量评估》:第二部分 心理测量学特性。","authors":"Xue Li PhD , Rui Li MSc , Meixuan Li MSc , Xu Hui MSc , Jing Li MSc , Liang Yao PhD , Harriette Van Spall MD, MPH , Kun Zhao PhD , Qiang Fu PhD , Feng Xie PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.08.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Health-related quality-of-life instruments for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have been commonly used to measure important patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and practices. This study aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of CVD-specific health-related quality-of-life instruments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature, Embase, and PubMed from inception to January 20, 2022. Studies that reported psychometric properties of CVD-specific instruments were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments methods for evaluating measurement properties and quality of evidence. Seven psychometric properties, including structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, divergent validity, discriminative validity, and responsiveness, were evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified 142 studies reporting psychometric properties of 40 instruments. Five (12.5%) instruments demonstrated measurement properties with sufficient or inconsistent ratings; 16 (40.0%) instruments did not report any responsiveness evidence. Of the 40 instruments, 15 (37.5%) instruments were rated sufficient with high quality of evidence on internal consistency; 4 (10.0%) on structural validity, convergent validity and divergent validity; and 3 (7.5%) on discriminative validity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>When measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials or routine practice, it is important to choose instruments with established psychometric properties.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":"28 2","pages":"Pages 294-305"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of Cardiovascular Disease–Specific Health-Related Quality-of-Life Instruments: Part II Psychometric Properties\",\"authors\":\"Xue Li PhD , Rui Li MSc , Meixuan Li MSc , Xu Hui MSc , Jing Li MSc , Liang Yao PhD , Harriette Van Spall MD, MPH , Kun Zhao PhD , Qiang Fu PhD , Feng Xie PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2024.08.011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Health-related quality-of-life instruments for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have been commonly used to measure important patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and practices. This study aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of CVD-specific health-related quality-of-life instruments.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We searched cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature, Embase, and PubMed from inception to January 20, 2022. Studies that reported psychometric properties of CVD-specific instruments were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments methods for evaluating measurement properties and quality of evidence. Seven psychometric properties, including structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, divergent validity, discriminative validity, and responsiveness, were evaluated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We identified 142 studies reporting psychometric properties of 40 instruments. Five (12.5%) instruments demonstrated measurement properties with sufficient or inconsistent ratings; 16 (40.0%) instruments did not report any responsiveness evidence. Of the 40 instruments, 15 (37.5%) instruments were rated sufficient with high quality of evidence on internal consistency; 4 (10.0%) on structural validity, convergent validity and divergent validity; and 3 (7.5%) on discriminative validity.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>When measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials or routine practice, it is important to choose instruments with established psychometric properties.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":\"28 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 294-305\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524066920\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524066920","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of Cardiovascular Disease–Specific Health-Related Quality-of-Life Instruments: Part II Psychometric Properties
Objectives
Health-related quality-of-life instruments for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) have been commonly used to measure important patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials and practices. This study aimed to systematically identify and evaluate the psychometric properties of CVD-specific health-related quality-of-life instruments.
Methods
We searched cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature, Embase, and PubMed from inception to January 20, 2022. Studies that reported psychometric properties of CVD-specific instruments were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments methods for evaluating measurement properties and quality of evidence. Seven psychometric properties, including structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, convergent validity, divergent validity, discriminative validity, and responsiveness, were evaluated.
Results
We identified 142 studies reporting psychometric properties of 40 instruments. Five (12.5%) instruments demonstrated measurement properties with sufficient or inconsistent ratings; 16 (40.0%) instruments did not report any responsiveness evidence. Of the 40 instruments, 15 (37.5%) instruments were rated sufficient with high quality of evidence on internal consistency; 4 (10.0%) on structural validity, convergent validity and divergent validity; and 3 (7.5%) on discriminative validity.
Conclusions
When measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials or routine practice, it is important to choose instruments with established psychometric properties.
期刊介绍:
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.