BackgroundSystematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments are important tools for the selection of instruments for research and clinical practice. Our aim was to assess the quality of systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments and to determine whether the quality has improved since our previous study in 2007.MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE and EMBASE between July 1, 2013, and June 19, 2014. The quality of the reviews was rated using a study-specific checklist.ResultsA total of 102 reviews were included. In many reviews the search strategy was considered not comprehensive; in only 59 % of the reviews a search was performed in EMBASE and in about half of the reviews there was doubt about the comprehensiveness of the search terms used for type of measurement instruments and measurement properties. In 41 % of the reviews, compared to 30 % in our previous study, the methodological quality of the included studies was assessed. In 58 %, compared to 55 %, the quality of the included instruments was assessed. In 42 %, compared to 7 %, a data synthesis was performed in which the results from multiple studies on the same instrument were somehow combined.ConclusionDespite a clear improvement in the quality of systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments in comparison with our previous study in 2007, there is still room for improvement with regard to the search strategy, and especially the quality assessment of the included studies and the included instruments, and the data synthesis.

No abstract

The main goal of the study was to evaluate Orbach's multidimensional model of mental pain in Italy, while constructing a reliable and valid Italian version of the 40-item Orbach and Mikulincer Mental Pain scale (OMMP) in a non-clinical sample. The sample consisted of 544 Italian adults. Findings indicated that the original 8-factor structure of the OMMP scale was not validated in our Italian version of the scale. Exploratory factors analyses yielded a 31item solution, with five main factors (Irreversibility, Lack of control and Freezing, Narcisistic wounds, Emotional flooding, Emptiness). Women scored higher than men in emotional flooding and lack of control, age was inversely related to the reported level of mental pain, and participants who were married or had a long, stable couple relationship showed lesser emotional suffering than singles.Further studies are needed in order to better understand the link between aversive affective states and mental pain in the Italian culture. A socio-demographic profile of people affected by mental pain is also needed in order to screen at risk-individuals, promote wellbeing and prevent self-harm or suicidal behaviors. In addition, future studies should attempt to replicate our findings in clinical samples as well as in people who attempted suicide in the Italian context.

No abstract

No abstract