COnsensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement INstruments Checklist

Mokkink, Lidwine B.; Terwee, Caroline B.; Patrick, Donald L.; Alonso, Jordi; Stratford, Paul W.; Knol, Dirk L.; Bouter, L.M.; Vet, H.C.W. de

doi:10.1037/t49678-000

Cited by 72 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

144

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All analyses were calculated using SAS statistical software (Version 9.4). In accordance with COSMIN guidelines, statistical significance was not used to formulate or interpret the pre-defined hypotheses of anticipated correlations because low correlations can become statistically significant in large populations and because it is not relevant whether the correlation deviates from zero, but whether there is some predefined magnitude of correlation 2,41,42,68,69 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, because they are able to both affect treatment efficacy and be improved by treatments in this patient group, psychological health outcomes such as anxiety and depression are also important outcomes of OA research 38,40,65 . Following state-of-the-art methodology from the COSMIN and PROMIS Standards, 42,43,54 this work can help researchers and clinicians meaningfully use PROMIS in future research and patient-care 33 , and help health systems make informed decisions on whether to integrate PROMIS for routine electronic medical record collection. 25 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety in Knee Osteoarthritis

Lee

Driban

Price

et al. 2017

The Journal of Pain

153

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instruments can provide valid, interpretable measures of health status among adults with osteoarthritis (OA). However, their ability to detect meaningful change over time is unknown. We evaluated the responsiveness and minimally important differences (MID) for four PROMIS Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety. We analyzed adults with symptomatic knee OA from our randomized trial comparing Tai Chi and physical therapy. Using baseline and 12-week scores, responsiveness was evaluated according to consensus standards by testing 6 a priori hypotheses of the correlations between PROMIS and legacy change scores. Responsiveness was considered high if ≥5 hypotheses were confirmed, and moderate if 3 or 4 were confirmed. MIDs were evaluated according to prospective change for people achieving previously-established MID on legacy comparators. The lowest and highest MIDs meeting a priori quality criteria formed an MID range for each PROMIS Short Form. Among 165 predominantly female (70%) and white (57%) participants, mean age was 61 years and body mass index was 33kg/m2. PROMIS Physical Function had 5 confirmed hypotheses and Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety had 3 or 4. MID ranges were: Depression=3.0–3.1; Anxiety=2.3–3.4; Physical Function=1.9–2.2; and Pain Interference=2.35–2.4. PROMIS Physical Function has high responsiveness, and Depression, Anxiety, and Pain Interference have moderate responsiveness among adults with knee OA. We established the first MIDs for PROMIS in this population, and provided an important standard of reference to better apply or interpret PROMIS in future trials or clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety in Knee Osteoarthritis

Lee

Driban

Price

et al. 2017

The Journal of Pain

153

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The determination of the validity of an instrument measuring a construct is important. This further research on its measurement properties should preferably be guided by the COSMIN manual [51]. Moreover, in the SCIROCCO project, the use of the B3-MM instrument will be further explored as a tool to facilitate the exchange of good practices and scaling-up of integrated care processes in Europe.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the article by Bautista et al [23], the quality assessment of the studies and the instruments is guided by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) [26285051]. In this study, the overall quality of the content validity for the instruments was assessed by the researchers (LG and HV) using the criteria for the levels of evidence and overall assessment of measurement properties of instrument (Table 2) by determining four factors [23274752].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Instrument to Measure Maturity of Integrated Care: A First Validation Study

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Lessons captured from interviews with 12 European regions are represented in a new instrument, the B3-Maturity Model (B3-MM). B3-MM aims to assess maturity along 12 dimensions reflecting the various aspects that need to be managed in order to deliver integrated care. The objective of the study was to test the content validity of B3-MM as part of SCIROCCO (Scaling Integrated Care into Context), a European Union funded project.Methods:A literature review was conducted to compare B3-MM’s 12 dimensions and their measurement scales with existing measures and instruments that focus on assessing the development of integrated care. Subsequently, a three-round survey conducted through a Delphi study with international experts in the field of integrated care was performed to test the relevance of: 1) the dimensions, 2) the maturity indicators and 3) the assessment scale used in B3-MM.Results:The 11 articles included in the literature review confirmed all the dimensions described in the original version of B3-MM. The Delphi study rounds resulted in various phrasing amendments of indicators and assessment scale. Full agreement among the experts on the relevance of the 12 B3-MM dimensions, their indicators, and assessment scale was reached after the third Delphi round.Conclusion and discussion:The B3-MM dimensions, maturity indicators and assessment scale showed satisfactory content validity. While the B3-MM is a unique instrument based on existing knowledge and experiences of regions in integrated care, further testing is needed to explore other measurement properties of B3-MM.

show abstract

“…La calidad metodológica (CM) fue evaluada por dos revisoras (ML, PS) a través de la lista COSMIN [35][36][37] . En este caso se consideraron los cuadros de la lista que evalúan validez de criterio y confiabilidad.…”

Section: Evaluación De Calidad Metodológicaunclassified

Validez y confiabilidad de las escalas de evaluación funcional en pacientes críticamente enfermos. Revisión sistemática

Libuy

et al. 2017

Rev. méd. Chile

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

COnsensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement INstruments Checklist

Cited by 72 publications

References 0 publications

Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety in Knee Osteoarthritis

Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety in Knee Osteoarthritis

An Instrument to Measure Maturity of Integrated Care: A First Validation Study

Validez y confiabilidad de las escalas de evaluación funcional en pacientes críticamente enfermos. Revisión sistemática

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About