COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures version 2.0.

Autor: Mokkink LB; Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Location AMC, J1B -225, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands. w.mokkink@amsterdamumc.nl.; Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Methodology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. w.mokkink@amsterdamumc.nl., Elsman EBM; Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Location AMC, J1B -225, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.; Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Methodology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands., Terwee CB; Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Location AMC, J1B -225, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105 AZ, The Netherlands.; Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Methodology, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation [Qual Life Res] 2024 Aug 28. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 28.
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-024-03761-6
Abstrakt: Purpose: Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools to select the most suitable PROM for a study or clinical application. Conducting these reviews is challenging, and the quality of these reviews needs to be improved. We updated the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs, including the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, and the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.
Methods: Adaptations to the methodology were based on our experience with applying the COSMIN guideline, through discussions among the authors, and results from two related Delphi studies.
Results: The updated guideline places more emphasis on key aspects that are often missing or sub optimally conducted in published systematic reviews of PROMs, such as formulating a well-defined research question and developing a comprehensive search strategy, assessing risk of bias, applying criteria for good measurement properties, summarizing results, and grading the quality of the evidence. We also stress the importance of evaluating the measurement properties of each subscale of a PROM separately and evaluating content validity of all included PROMs.
Conclusion: The quality of systematic reviews of PROMs can be improved by using this updated version of the COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs. Improved quality will lead to better PROM selection and increased standardization of PROM use.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: