scholarly journals How to Assess Shoulder Functionality: A Systematic Review of Existing Validated Outcome Measures

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 845
Author(s):  
Rocio Aldon-Villegas ◽  
Carmen Ridao-Fernández ◽  
Dolores Torres-Enamorado ◽  
Gema Chamorro-Moriana
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Patient Selection ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Daily Living ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Reference Lists ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Operating Instructions

The objective of this review was to compile validated functional shoulder assessment tools and analyse the methodological quality of their validations. Secondarily, we aimed to provide a comparison of the tools, including parameter descriptions, indications/applications, languages and operating instructions, to choose the most suitable for future clinical and research approaches. A systematic review (PRISMA) was conducted using: PubMed, WoS Scopus, CINHAL, Dialnet and reference lists until 2020. The main criteria for inclusion were that papers were original studies of validated tools or validation studies. Pre-established tables showed tools, validations, items/components, etc. The QUADAS-2 and COSMIN-RB were used to assess the methodological quality of validations. Ultimately, 85 studies were selected, 32 tools and 111 validations. Risk of bias scored lower than applicability, and patient selection got the best scores (QUADAS-2). Internal consistency had the highest quality and PROMs development the lowest (COSMIN-RB). Responsiveness was the most analysed metric property. Modified UCLA and SST obtained the highest quality in shoulder instability surgery, and SPADI in pain. The most approached topic was activities of daily living (81%). We compiled 32 validated functional shoulder assessment tools, and conducted an analysis of the methodological quality of 111 validations associated with them. Modified UCLA and SST showed the highest methodological quality in instability surgery and SPADI in pain.

scholarly journals Rapid diagnostic test for antenatal syphilis screening in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e018132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carmen Phang Romero Casas ◽  
Marrissa Martyn-St James ◽  
Jean Hamilton ◽  
Daniel S Marinho ◽  
Rodolfo Castro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Antenatal Clinics

ObjectivesTo undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the test performance including sensitivity and specificity of rapid immunochromatographic syphilis (ICS) point-of-care (POC) tests at antenatal clinics compared with reference standard tests (non-treponemal (TP) and TP tests) for active syphilis in pregnant women.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched (PubMed, EMBASE, CRD, Cochrane Library and LILACS) to March 2016 for diagnostic accuracy studies of ICS test and standard reference tests for syphilis in pregnant women. Methodological quality was assessed using QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies). A bivariate meta-analysis was undertaken to generate pooled estimates of diagnostic parameters. Results were presented using a coupled forest plot of sensitivity and specificity and a scatter plot.ResultsThe methodological quality of the five included studies with regards to risk of bias and applicability concern judgements was either low or unclear. One study was judged as high risk of bias for patient selection due to exclusion of pregnant women with a previous history of syphilis, and one study was judged at high risk of bias for study flow and timing as not all patients were included in the analysis. Five studies contributed to the meta-analysis, providing a pooled sensitivity and specificity for ICS of 0.85 (95% CrI: 0.73 to 0.92) and 0.98 (95% CrI: 0.95 to 0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThis review and meta-analysis observed that rapid ICS POC tests have a high sensitivity and specificity when performed in pregnant women at antenatal clinics. However, the methodological quality of the existing evidence base should be taken into consideration when interpreting these results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42016036335.

scholarly journals Measuring patient satisfaction with video consultation: a systematic review of assessment tools and their measurement properties

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 356-362
Author(s):  
Esther Z. Barsom ◽  
Ewout van Hees ◽  
Willem A. Bemelman ◽  
Marlies P. Schijven
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Outcome Analysis ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Healthcare Settings ◽  
Video Consultation

BackgroundVideo consultation (VC) is considered promising in delivering healthcare closer to the patient and improving patient satisfaction. Indeed, providing care-at-distance via VC is believed to be promising for some situations and patients, serving their needs without associated concomitant costs. In order to assess implementation and perceived benefits, patient satisfaction is frequently measured. Measuring patient satisfaction with VC in healthcare is often performed using quantitative and qualitative outcome analysis. As studies employ different surveys, pooling of data on the topic is troublesome. This systematic review critically appraises, summarizes, and compares available questionnaires in order to identify the most suitable questionnaire for qualitative outcome research using VC in clinical outpatient care.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched for relevant articles using predefined inclusion criteria. Methodological quality appraisal of yielded questionnaires to assess VC was performed using the validated COSMIN guideline.ResultsThis systematic search identified twelve studies that used ten different patient satisfaction questionnaires. The overall quality of nine questionnaires was rated as “inadequate” to “doubtful” according to the COSMIN criteria. None of the questionnaires retrieved completed a robust validation process for the purpose of use.Conclusion and recommendationsAlthough high-quality studies on measurement properties of these questionnaires are scarce, the questionnaire developed by Mekhjian has the highest methodological quality achieving validity on internal consistency and the use of a large sample size. Moreover, this questionnaire can be used across healthcare settings. This finding may be instrumental in further studies measuring patient satisfaction with VC.

scholarly journals Psychometric properties of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy: a COSMIN systematic review protocol

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett Williams ◽  
Bronwyn Beovich
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Measurement ◽  
Jefferson Scale Of Empathy

Abstract Background Empathy is an important characteristic to possess for healthcare professionals. It has been found to improve communication between professionals and patients and to improve clinical health outcomes. The Jefferson Scale of Empathy (JSE) was developed to measure this quality and has been used extensively, and psychometrically appraised, with a variety of cohorts and in different cultural environments. However, no study has been undertaken to systematically examine the methodological quality of studies which have assessed psychometric factors of the JSE. This systematic review will examine the quality of published papers that have reported on psychometric factors of the JSE. Methods A systematic review of studies which report on the psychometric properties of the JSE will be conducted. We will use a predefined search strategy to identify studies meeting the following eligibility criteria: original data is reported on for at least one of the psychometric measurement properties described in the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist, examines the JSE in a healthcare cohort (using the student, physician or health profession versions of the JSE), and is published from January 2001 and in the English language. Conference abstracts, editorials and grey literature will be excluded. Six electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, PsychInfo, PubMed, Web of Science and CINAHL) will be systematically searched for articles meeting these criteria and studies will be assessed for eligibility by two review authors. The methodological quality of included papers will be examined using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Discussion A narrative description of the findings will be presented along with summary tables. Recommendations for use of the JSE with various cohorts and circumstances will be offered which may inform future research in this field. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42018111412

P14.71 An assessment of the reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews and meta-analyses

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. ii51-ii52
Author(s):  
A M George ◽  
S Gupta ◽  
S M Keshwara ◽  
M A Mustafa ◽  
C S Gillespie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Neurofibromatosis Type ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Measurement Tool ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract BACKGROUND Systematic reviews and meta-analyses constitute the highest level of research evidence and for a disease with limited clinical trial activity, are often relied upon to help inform clinical practice. This review of reviews evaluates both the reporting & methodological quality of meningioma evidence syntheses. MATERIAL AND METHODS Potentially eligible meningioma reviews published between 1st January 1990 and 31st December 2020 were identified from eight electronic databases. Inclusion required the study to meet the Cochrane guideline definition of a systematic review or meta-analysis. Reviews concerning neurofibromatosis type 2, spinal and pediatric meningiomas were excluded. The reporting and methodological quality of articles were assessed against the following modified guidelines: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA), A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR2) and the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) guidelines. RESULTS 117 systematic reviews were identified, 57 of which included meta-analysis (48.7%). The number of meningioma systematic reviews published each year has increased with 63 studies (53.9%) published between 01/2018 and 12/2020. A median of 17 studies (IQR 9–29) were included per review. Impact factor of journals publishing a systematic review with or without a meta-analysis was similar (median 2.3 vs 1.8, P=0.397). The mean PRISMA scores for systematic reviews with a meta-analysis was 21.11 (SD 4.1, 78% adherence) and without was 13.89 (SD 3.4, 63% adherence). Twenty-nine systematic reviews with meta-analysis (51%) and 11 without meta-analysis (18%) achieved greater than 80% adherence to PRISMA recommendations. Methodological quality assessment using AMSTAR2 revealed one study (0.9%) as high quality whilst 111 (94.8%) studies were graded as critically low. One hundred and two articles (87.2%) did not utilize a comprehensive search strategy as defined by the AMSTAR2 tool. Ninety-nine studies (84.6%) obtained a high level of concern for potential bias as per the ROBIS assessment. One hundred and eight articles (92.3%) failed to present information that a protocol had been established prior to study commencement and 76 articles (65.0%) did not conduct a risk of bias assessment. Across the three tools, domains relating to the establishment of a protocol prior to review commencement and conducting appropriate risk of bias assessments were frequently low scoring. CONCLUSION Overall reporting and methodological quality of meningioma systematic reviews was sub-optimal. Established critical appraisal tools and reporting guidelines should be utilized a priori to assist in producing high-quality systematic reviews.

scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of turmeric extracts in knee osteoarthritis: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhiqiang Wang ◽  
Ambrish Singh ◽  
Benny Antony
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomised Controlled

AbstractTurmeric extracts have been used as a remedy for treating arthritis in traditional medicine. Recent years have witnessed the rise of different extracts from turmeric and randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of these extracts for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). This planned systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of turmeric extracts for the treatment of knee OA. Biomedical databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and Embase will be searched for RCTs reporting safety and efficacy of turmeric extracts for the treatment of knee OA. Cochrane risk of bias tool will be used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies, and a meta-analysis will be performed to pool the effect estimates.

scholarly journals Acupuncture as an Add-On Treatment for Functional Dyspepsia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chan-Young Kwon ◽  
Seok-Jae Ko ◽  
Boram Lee ◽  
Jae Myung Cha ◽  
Jin Young Yoon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Functional Dyspepsia ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effective Rate ◽  
Sham Acupuncture ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Acupuncture Group

Background: We aimed to critically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of acupuncture as an add-on therapy to conventional Western medication (WM) and assess the quality of evidence (QoE) of these findings.Methods: A total of 12 English, Korean, and Chinese databases were searched on December 18, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of acupuncture as an add-on therapy to conventional WM for functional dyspepsia (FD) were included. The primary outcome was the symptom score of FD. The risk of bias of the included studies and QoE were evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method, respectively.Results: A total of 22 RCTs were included. The total and individual FD symptom scores were significantly improved in the acupuncture combined with WM groups compared with the WM alone groups, except for in one study. The Nepean dyspepsia index score and total effective rate mostly improved significantly in the acupuncture group, regardless of the WM used and acupuncture type. FD-related biomarkers, such as ghrelin and gastrin levels, showed mixed results. The acupuncture group showed a significantly lower recurrence rate after 3–6 months of follow-up than the WM alone group. There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events between the two groups. The included studies generally had low methodological quality. The QoE for the main findings was generally very low to moderate.Conclusion: Limited evidence suggests that acupuncture has the potential to improve FD treatment in combination with conventional WM. Furthermore, the methodological quality of the included studies and QoE of the main findings were generally low. Therefore, RCTs with a rigorous methodology, including sham acupuncture and multiethnic subjects, should be performed.Systematic Review Registration: OSF registries [https://osf.io/mxren], PROSPERO [CRD42021226608].

scholarly journals A comparison between two recommendations to conduct and report systematic reviews on drug’s safety

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Penedones ◽  
Carlos Alves ◽  
Francisco Batel Marques
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Post Marketing ◽  
Review Question ◽  
Marketing Data

Abstract Background Several recommendations are available to conduct and report a systematic review of adverse drug reactions. This study is aimed at identifying and comparing the methodologies of the two most commonly used recommendations to conduct and report systematic reviews on drug’s safety. Methods Two systematic reviews were conducted following the recommendations “Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions” and “Systematic Reviews’ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare.” The methods of each recommendation were characterized, and the results and the discussion of each systematic review were also evaluated. Results The methodologies of both recommendations are similar. The review question was structured. Both recommendations suggest to include pre- and post-marketing data. The recommended data sources differed and, consequently, the results of the systematic reviews (37 vs. 35 studies). Other aspects of search literature were identical. Different tools are suggested to evaluate the methodological quality of the included studies. For case reports, both recommendations only report some questions that may be helpful to assess risk of bias. The reporting of the results and discussion is also identical for both recommendations. Conclusions Few methodological differences were observed between the analyzed recommendations to conduct a systematic review on drug’s safety. Combining their methods into a single and recognized recommendation could be of great value.

scholarly journals School health assessment tools: a systematic review of measurement in primary schools

PeerJ ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. e9459
Author(s):  
Maryam Kazemitabar ◽  
Ali Moghadamzadeh ◽  
Mojtaba Habibi ◽  
Rezvan Hakimzadeh ◽  
Danilo Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Primary Schools ◽  
School Health ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Measurement Properties ◽  
Cosmin Checklist

Background This systematic review aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the school health’s assessment tools in primary schools through COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. We examined the studies that have addressed the measurement properties of school-health instruments to give a clear overview of the quality of all available tools measuring school health in primary schools. This systematic review was registered in PROPERO with the Registration ID: CRD42020158158. Method Databases of EBSCOhost, PubMed, ProQuest, Wily, PROSPERO, and OpenGrey were systematically searched without any time limitation to find all full-text English journal articles studied at least one of the COSMIN checklist measurement properties of a school-health assessment tool in primary schools. The instruments should be constructed based on a school health model. The eligible studies were assessed by COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist to report their quality of methodology for each measurement property and for the whole study by rating high, moderate or low quality. Results At the final screening just seven studies remained for review. Four studies were tool development, three of them were rated as “adequate” and the other study as “very good”; five studies examined the content validity, three of them were appraised as “very good”, and the two remaining as “inadequate”. All seven studies measured structural validity, three of them were evaluated as “very good”, three other were scored as “adequate”, and the last study as “inadequate”. All the seven studies investigated the internal consistency, five of them were assessed as “very good”, one was rated as “doubtful”, and the last one as “inadequate”. Just one study examined the cross-cultural validity and was rated as “adequate”. Finally, all seven studies measured reliability, two of them were rated as “very good” and the rest five studies were appraised as “doubtful”. All rating was based on COSMIN checklist criteria for quality of measurement properties assessment. Conclusion The number of studies addressing school health assessment tools was very low and therefore not sufficient. Hence, there is a serious need to investigate the psychometric properties of the available instruments measuring school health at primary schools. Moreover, the studies included in the present systematic review did not fulfill all the criteria of the COSMIN checklist for assessing measurement properties. We suggest that future studies consider these criteria for measuring psychometric properties and developing school health assessment tools.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness and Safety of Mind-Body Modalities for Mental Health of Nurses in Hospital Setting: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (16) ◽  
pp. 8855
Author(s):  
Su-Eun Jung ◽  
Da-Jung Ha ◽  
Jung-Hyun Park ◽  
Boram Lee ◽  
Myo-Sung Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Hospital Setting ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Comprehensive Search

The mental health of nurses including burnout is an important issue. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate whether mind-body modalities improve burnout and other mental health aspects of nurses. A comprehensive search was conducted using six electronic databases. Randomized controlled trials using mind-body modalities on the mental health of nurses, up to January 2021, were included. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Seventeen studies were included in the review. Data on mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and yoga were available for burnout, and there was no evidence that multimodal resilience programs including MBIs statistically significantly improved burnout levels compared to no intervention or active control groups. However, one study reported that yoga could significantly improve emotional exhaustion and depersonalization, which are subscales of burnout, compared to usual care. In addition, the effects of MBIs, relaxation, yoga, and music on various mental health outcomes and stress-related symptoms have been reported. In conclusion, there was some evidence that yoga was helpful for improvement in burnout of nurses. However, due to the heterogeneity of interventions and outcomes of the studies included, further high-quality clinical trials are needed on this topic in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document