Jane Jomy, P Jani, F Sheikh, R Charide, J Mah, R J Couban, B Kligler, A J Darzi, B K White, T Hoppe, J W Busse, D Zeraatkar
{"title":"退伍军人健康测量仪器及其适用性的系统评价。","authors":"Jane Jomy, P Jani, F Sheikh, R Charide, J Mah, R J Couban, B Kligler, A J Darzi, B K White, T Hoppe, J W Busse, D Zeraatkar","doi":"10.1136/military-2022-002219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Accurate measurement of health status is essential to assess veterans' needs and the effects of interventions directed at improving veterans' well-being. We conducted a systematic review to identify instruments that measure subjective health status, considering four components (ie, physical, mental, social or spiritual well-being).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, we searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, JSTOR, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts and ProQuest in June 2021 for studies reporting on the development or evaluation of instruments measuring subjective health among outpatient populations. We assessed risk of bias with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments tool and engaged three veteran partners to independently assess the clarity and applicability of identified instruments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5863 abstracts screened, we identified 45 eligible articles that reported health-related instruments in the following categories: general health (n=19), mental health (n=7), physical health (n=8), social health (n=3) and spiritual health (n=8). We found evidence for adequate internal consistency for 39 instruments (87%) and good test-retest reliability for 24 (53%) instruments. Of these, our veteran partners identified five instruments for the measurement of subjective health (Military to Civilian Questionnaire (M2C-Q), Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey (VR-36), Short Form 36, Abbreviated World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) and Sleep Health Scale) as clear and very applicable to veterans. Of the two instruments developed and validated among veterans, the 16-item M2C-Q considered most components of health (mental, social and spiritual). Of the three instruments not validated among veterans, only the 26-item WHOQOL-BREF considered all four components of health.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We identified 45 health measurement instruments of which, among those reporting adequate psychometric properties and endorsed by our veteran partners, 2 instruments showed the most promise for measurement of subjective health. The M2C-Q, which requires augmentation to capture physical health (eg, the physical component score of the VR-36), and the WHOQOL-BREF, which requires validation among veterans.</p>","PeriodicalId":48485,"journal":{"name":"Bmj Military Health","volume":" ","pages":"155-165"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health measurement instruments and their applicability to military veterans: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Jane Jomy, P Jani, F Sheikh, R Charide, J Mah, R J Couban, B Kligler, A J Darzi, B K White, T Hoppe, J W Busse, D Zeraatkar\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/military-2022-002219\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Accurate measurement of health status is essential to assess veterans' needs and the effects of interventions directed at improving veterans' well-being. We conducted a systematic review to identify instruments that measure subjective health status, considering four components (ie, physical, mental, social or spiritual well-being).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, we searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, JSTOR, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts and ProQuest in June 2021 for studies reporting on the development or evaluation of instruments measuring subjective health among outpatient populations. We assessed risk of bias with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments tool and engaged three veteran partners to independently assess the clarity and applicability of identified instruments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 5863 abstracts screened, we identified 45 eligible articles that reported health-related instruments in the following categories: general health (n=19), mental health (n=7), physical health (n=8), social health (n=3) and spiritual health (n=8). We found evidence for adequate internal consistency for 39 instruments (87%) and good test-retest reliability for 24 (53%) instruments. Of these, our veteran partners identified five instruments for the measurement of subjective health (Military to Civilian Questionnaire (M2C-Q), Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey (VR-36), Short Form 36, Abbreviated World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) and Sleep Health Scale) as clear and very applicable to veterans. Of the two instruments developed and validated among veterans, the 16-item M2C-Q considered most components of health (mental, social and spiritual). Of the three instruments not validated among veterans, only the 26-item WHOQOL-BREF considered all four components of health.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We identified 45 health measurement instruments of which, among those reporting adequate psychometric properties and endorsed by our veteran partners, 2 instruments showed the most promise for measurement of subjective health. The M2C-Q, which requires augmentation to capture physical health (eg, the physical component score of the VR-36), and the WHOQOL-BREF, which requires validation among veterans.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48485,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bmj Military Health\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"155-165\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bmj Military Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/military-2022-002219\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bmj Military Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/military-2022-002219","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
引言:准确测量健康状况对于评估退伍军人的需求和旨在改善退伍军人福祉的干预措施的效果至关重要。我们进行了一项系统综述,以确定衡量主观健康状况的工具,考虑四个组成部分(即身体、心理、社会或精神健康)。方法:根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目,我们于2021年6月检索了CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, JSTOR, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts和ProQuest,以报告门诊人群主观健康测量工具的开发或评估。我们使用基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准评估了偏倚风险,并聘请了三位资深合作伙伴独立评估已确定工具的清晰度和适用性。结果:在筛选的5863篇摘要中,我们确定了45篇符合条件的文章,这些文章报告了以下类别中与健康相关的指标:一般健康(n=19)、心理健康(n=7)、身体健康(n=8)、社会健康(n=3)和精神健康(n=8)。我们发现有证据表明39种仪器(87%)具有足够的内部一致性,24种仪器(53%)具有良好的重测信度。其中,我们的退伍军人合作伙伴确定了五种测量主观健康的工具(军民问卷(m2a - q),退伍军人兰德36项健康调查(VR-36),简短表格36,简略世界卫生组织生活质量问卷(WHOQOL-BREF)和睡眠健康量表)明确且非常适用于退伍军人。在退伍军人中开发和验证的两种工具中,M2C-Q包含16个项目,考虑了健康的大多数组成部分(心理、社会和精神)。在未在退伍军人中得到验证的三个工具中,只有26个项目的WHOQOL-BREF考虑了健康的所有四个组成部分。结论:我们确定了45种健康测量工具,其中有2种工具是最有希望测量主观健康的,在这些工具中有充分的心理测量特性并得到了我们的资深合作伙伴的认可。M2C-Q,需要增强以捕获身体健康(例如,VR-36的身体成分得分),以及WHOQOL-BREF,需要在退伍军人中进行验证。
Health measurement instruments and their applicability to military veterans: a systematic review.
Introduction: Accurate measurement of health status is essential to assess veterans' needs and the effects of interventions directed at improving veterans' well-being. We conducted a systematic review to identify instruments that measure subjective health status, considering four components (ie, physical, mental, social or spiritual well-being).
Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, we searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, JSTOR, ERIC, Social Sciences Abstracts and ProQuest in June 2021 for studies reporting on the development or evaluation of instruments measuring subjective health among outpatient populations. We assessed risk of bias with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments tool and engaged three veteran partners to independently assess the clarity and applicability of identified instruments.
Results: Of 5863 abstracts screened, we identified 45 eligible articles that reported health-related instruments in the following categories: general health (n=19), mental health (n=7), physical health (n=8), social health (n=3) and spiritual health (n=8). We found evidence for adequate internal consistency for 39 instruments (87%) and good test-retest reliability for 24 (53%) instruments. Of these, our veteran partners identified five instruments for the measurement of subjective health (Military to Civilian Questionnaire (M2C-Q), Veterans RAND 36-Item Health Survey (VR-36), Short Form 36, Abbreviated World Health Organization Quality of Life questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) and Sleep Health Scale) as clear and very applicable to veterans. Of the two instruments developed and validated among veterans, the 16-item M2C-Q considered most components of health (mental, social and spiritual). Of the three instruments not validated among veterans, only the 26-item WHOQOL-BREF considered all four components of health.
Conclusion: We identified 45 health measurement instruments of which, among those reporting adequate psychometric properties and endorsed by our veteran partners, 2 instruments showed the most promise for measurement of subjective health. The M2C-Q, which requires augmentation to capture physical health (eg, the physical component score of the VR-36), and the WHOQOL-BREF, which requires validation among veterans.