COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties. Methods: For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Results: Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system. Conclusions: The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1171-1179
Number of pages9
JournalQuality of Life Research
Volume27
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2018

Cite this

@article{f3cd5b1d9f19462c97aa1a951b367875,
title = "COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures",
abstract = "Purpose: The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties. Methods: For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Results: Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system. Conclusions: The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.",
keywords = "Measurement properties, Outcome measurement instruments, Quality assessment, Risk of bias, Systematic review",
author = "Mokkink, {L. B.} and {de Vet}, {H. C.W.} and Prinsen, {C. A.C.} and Patrick, {D. L.} and J. Alonso and Bouter, {L. M.} and Terwee, {C. B.}",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "1171--1179",
journal = "Quality of Life Research",
issn = "0962-9343",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "5",

}

COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. / Mokkink, L. B.; de Vet, H. C.W.; Prinsen, C. A.C.; Patrick, D. L.; Alonso, J.; Bouter, L. M.; Terwee, C. B.

In: Quality of Life Research, Vol. 27, No. 5, 05.2018, p. 1171-1179.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

AU - Mokkink, L. B.

AU - de Vet, H. C.W.

AU - Prinsen, C. A.C.

AU - Patrick, D. L.

AU - Alonso, J.

AU - Bouter, L. M.

AU - Terwee, C. B.

PY - 2018/5

Y1 - 2018/5

N2 - Purpose: The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties. Methods: For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Results: Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system. Conclusions: The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.

AB - Purpose: The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties. Methods: For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Results: Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system. Conclusions: The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.

KW - Measurement properties

KW - Outcome measurement instruments

KW - Quality assessment

KW - Risk of bias

KW - Systematic review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85038398381&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4

DO - 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4

M3 - Review article

VL - 27

SP - 1171

EP - 1179

JO - Quality of Life Research

JF - Quality of Life Research

SN - 0962-9343

IS - 5

ER -