Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-05-2012

Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist

Authors: Caroline B. Terwee, Lidwine B. Mokkink, Dirk L. Knol, Raymond W. J. G. Ostelo, Lex M. Bouter, Henrica C. W. de Vet

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 4/2012

Abstract

Background

The COSMIN checklist is a standardized tool for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties. It contains 9 boxes, each dealing with one measurement property, with 5–18 items per box about design aspects and statistical methods. Our aim was to develop a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist to calculate quality scores per measurement property when using the checklist in systematic reviews of measurement properties.

Methods

The scoring system was developed based on discussions among experts and testing of the scoring system on 46 articles from a systematic review. Four response options were defined for each COSMIN item (excellent, good, fair, and poor). A quality score per measurement property is obtained by taking the lowest rating of any item in a box (“worst score counts”).

Results

Specific criteria for excellent, good, fair, and poor quality for each COSMIN item are described. In defining the criteria, the “worst score counts” algorithm was taken into consideration. This means that only fatal flaws were defined as poor quality. The scores of the 46 articles show how the scoring system can be used to provide an overview of the methodological quality of studies included in a systematic review of measurement properties.

Conclusions

Based on experience in testing this scoring system on 46 articles, the COSMIN checklist with the proposed scoring system seems to be a useful tool for assessing the methodological quality of studies included in systematic reviews of measurement properties.

Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Stratford, P. W., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., Riphagen, I., et al. (2009). Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 18, 313–333.PubMedCrossRef

Higgins, J. P. T. & Green, S. (Eds.). (2009). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.2 [updated September 2009]. (Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org: Cochrane Collaboration).

Haywood, K. L., Garratt, A. M., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006). Quality of life in older people: A structured review of self-assessed health instruments. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 6, 181–194.PubMedCrossRef

Alla, S., Sullivan, S. J., Hale, L., & McCrory, P. (2009). Self-report scales/checklists for the measurement of concussion symptoms: a systematic review. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 43(Suppl 1), i3–i12.CrossRef

Marinus, J., Ramaker, C., van Hilten, J. J., & Stiggelbout, A. M. (2002). Health related quality of life in Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review of disease specific instruments. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 72, 241–248.CrossRef

Wind, H., Gouttebarge, V., Kuijer, P. P. F. M., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. (2005). Assessment of functional capacity of the musculoskeletal system in the context of work, daily living, and sport: A systematic review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 253–272.CrossRef

Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 19, 539–549.CrossRef

Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Knol, D. L., Stratford, P. W., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Medical Research Methodeology, 10, 22.CrossRef

Schellingerhout, J. M., Verhagen, A. P., Heymans, M. W., Koes, B. W., de Vet, H. C. W., & Terwee, C. B. (2011). Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: a systematic review. Quality of Life Research. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-9965-9.

10.

Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

11.

de Vet, H. C. W., Ader, H. J., Terwee, C. B., & Pouwer, F. (2005). Are factor analytical techniques appropriately used in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analyses of the SF-36. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1203–1218.PubMedCrossRef

12.

de Vet, H. C. W., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. J. (2011). Measurement in medicine. A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef

13.

Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Onso-Coello, P., et al. (2008). GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal, 336, 924–926.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Furlan, A. D., Pennick, V., Bombardier, C., & van Tulder, M. (2009). 2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34, 1929–1941.

15.

Terwee, C. B., Schellingerhout, J. M., Verhagen, A. P., Koes, B. W., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2011). Methodological quality of studies on the measurement properties of neck pain and disability questionnaires: a systematic review. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 34, 261–272.CrossRef

16.

Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11, 193–205.CrossRef

17.

Valderas, J. M., Ferrer, M., Mendivil, J., Garin, O., Rajmil, L., Herdman, M., et al. (2008). Development of EMPRO: A tool for the standardized assessment of patient-reported outcome measures. Value in Health, 11, 700–708.CrossRef

18.

Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 34–42.CrossRef

19.

Brozek, J. L., Akl, E. A., Jaeschke, R., Lang, D. M., Bossuyt, P., Glasziou, P., et al. (2009). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: Part 2 of 3. The GRADE approach to grading quality of evidence about diagnostic tests and strategies. Allergy, 64, 1109–1116.CrossRef

Title: Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist
Authors: Caroline B. Terwee
Lidwine B. Mokkink
Dirk L. Knol
Raymond W. J. G. Ostelo
Lex M. Bouter
Henrica C. W. de Vet
Publication date: 01-05-2012
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Quality of Life Research / Issue 4/2012
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2012

Latent variable mixture models: a promising approach for the validation of patient reported outcomes

An assessment of the construct validity of the CHU9D in the Australian adolescent general population

Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: a systematic review

Changes in drug use are associated with health-related quality of life improvements among methadone maintenance patients with HIV/AIDS

Translating ‘distress’ and screening for emotional distress in multicultural cancer patients in Israel

Can quality or quality-of-life be defined?