Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Quality of Life Research
Published in: Quality of Life Research 5/2018

Open Access 01-05-2018

COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures

Authors: C. A. C. Prinsen, L. B. Mokkink, L. M. Bouter, J. Alonso, D. L. Patrick, H. C. W. de Vet, C. B. Terwee

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 5/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ from reviews of interventions and diagnostic test accuracy studies and are complex. In fact, conducting a review of one or more PROMs comprises of multiple reviews (i.e., one review for each measurement property of each PROM). In the absence of guidance specifically designed for reviews on measurement properties, our aim was to develop a guideline for conducting systematic reviews of PROMs.

Methods

Based on literature reviews and expert opinions, and in concordance with existing guidelines, the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) steering committee developed a guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs.

Results

A consecutive ten-step procedure for conducting a systematic review of PROMs is proposed. Steps 1–4 concern preparing and performing the literature search, and selecting relevant studies. Steps 5–8 concern the evaluation of the quality of the eligible studies, the measurement properties, and the interpretability and feasibility aspects. Steps 9 and 10 concern formulating recommendations and reporting the systematic review.

Conclusions

The COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of PROMs includes methodology to combine the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties with the quality of the PROM itself (i.e., its measurement properties). This enables reviewers to draw transparent conclusions and making evidence-based recommendations on the quality of PROMs, and supports the evidence-based selection of PROMs for use in research and in clinical practice.
Literature
1.
2.
Griffiths, C., Armstrong-James, L., White, P., Rumsey, N., Pleat, J., & Harcourt, D. (2015). A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in child and adolescent burn research. Burns, 41(2), 212–224.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Hermans, H., van der Pas, F. H., & Evenhuis, H. M. (2011). Instruments assessing anxiety in adults with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(3), 861–870.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Keage, M., Delatycki, M., Corben, L., & Vogel, A. (2015). A systematic review of self-reported swallowing assessments in progressive neurological disorders. Dysphagia, 30(1), 27–46.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Ritmala-Castren, M., Lakanmaa, R. L., Virtanen, I., & Leino-Kilpi, H. (2014). Evaluating adult patients’ sleep: An integrative literature review in critical care. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 28(3), 435–448.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A., Ricci Garotti, M. G., Suman, A., de Vet, H. C., & Mokkink, L. B. (2016). The quality of systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 25(4), 767–779.CrossRefPubMed
8.
9.
Mokkink, L. B., Prinsen, C. A., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., de Vet, H. C., & Terwee, C. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) – user manual. http://​www.​cosmin.​nl/​.
10.
Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A., Chiarotto, A., de Vet, H. C., Bouter, L. M., Alonso, J., Westerman, M. J., Patrick, D. L., & Mokkink, L. B. (2018). COSMIN methodology for assessing the content validity of PROMs – user manual. http://​www.​cosmin.​nl/​.
11.
Collins, N. J., Prinsen, C. A., Christensen, R., Bartels, E. M., Terwee, C. B., & Roos, E. M. (2016). Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): Systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 24(8), 1317–1329.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Gerbens, L. A., Prinsen, C. A., Chalmers, J. R., Drucker, A. M., von Kobyletzki, L. B., Limpens, J., Nankervis, H., Svensson, Å., Terwee, C. B., Zhang, J., Apfelbacher, C. J., Spuls, P. I. & Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative. (2017). Evaluation of the measurement properties of symptom measurement instruments for atopic eczema: a systematic review. Allergy, 72(1), 146–163.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Chinapaw, M. J., Mokkink, L. B., van Poppel, M. N., van Mechelen, W., & Terwee, C. B. (2010). Physical activity questionnaires for youth: A systematic review of measurement properties. Sports Medicine, 40(7), 539–563.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Speksnijder, C. M., Koppenaal, T., Knottnerus, J. A., Spigt, M., Staal, J. B., & Terwee, C. B. (2016). Measurement properties of the quebec back pain disability scale in patients with nonspecific low back pain. Systematic review. Physical Theraphy, 96(11), 1816–1831.CrossRef
15.
Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., Knol, D. L., Ostelo, R. W., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2012). Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Quality of Life Research, 21(4), 651–657.CrossRefPubMed
16.
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 Methodology, 10, 22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
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(3), 313–333.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Terwee, C. B., Prinsen, C. A., Chiarotto, A., Westerman, M. J., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., et al. (2017). COSMIN standards and criteria for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: A Delphi study. (Submitted to Quality of Life Research).
19.
Prinsen, C. A., Vohra, S., Rose, M. R., Boers, M., Tugwell, P., Clarke, M., et al. (2016). How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” - A practical guideline. Trials, 17(1), 449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration (2011). http://​handbook.​cochrane.​org/​. Accessed 5 Feb 2018.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Elbers, R. G., Rietberg, M. B., van Wegen, E. E., Verhoef, J., Kramer, S. F., Terwee, C. B., & Kwakkel, G. (2012). Self-report fatigue questionnaires in multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease and stroke: A systematic review of measurement properties. Quality of Life Research, 21(6), 925–944.CrossRefPubMed
26.
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(4), 539–549.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
Terwee, C. B., Jansma, E. P., Riphagen, I. I., & de Vet, H. C. (2009). Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Quality of Life Research, 18(8), 1115–1123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
28.
Mokkink, L. B., de Vet, H. C. W., Prinsen, C. A. C., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Bouter, L. M., & Terwee, C. B. (2017). COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11136-017-1765-4.
29.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745.CrossRefPubMed
31.
de Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. L. (2011). Measurement in medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
32.
Fayers, P. M., Hand, D. J., Bjordal, K., & Groenvold, M. (1997). Causal indicators in quality of life research. Quality of Life Research, 6(5), 393–406.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98–104.CrossRef
34.
Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
35.
Crosby, R. D., Kolotkin, R. L., & Williams, G. R. (2003). Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(5), 395–407.CrossRefPubMed
36.
de Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Ostelo, R. W., Beckerman, H., Knol, D. L., & Bouter, L. M. (2006). Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: Distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
37.
de Vet, H. C., Ostelo, R. W., Terwee, C. B., van der Roer, N., Knol, D. L., Beckerman, H., et al. (2007). Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Quality of Life Research, 16(1), 131–142.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., & Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(2), 102–109.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Yost, K. J., Eton, D. T., Garcia, S. F., & Cella, D. (2011). Minimally important differences were estimated for six patient-reported outcomes measurement information system-cancer scales in advanced-stage cancer patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(5), 507–516.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
van Kampen, D. A., Willems, W. J., van Beers, L. W., Castelein, R. M., Scholtes, V. A., & Terwee, C. B. (2013). Determination and comparison of the smallest detectable change (SDC) and the minimal important change (MIC) of four-shoulder patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 8, 40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
42.
43.
Chiarotto, A., Ostelo, R. W., Boers, M., & Terwee, C. B. (2017). A systematic review highlights the need to investigate the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures for physical functioning in low back pain. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, S0895–S4356(17), 30543–30547. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​j.​jclinepi.​2017.​11.​005.
44.
Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. D., Akl, E. A., Kunz, R., Vist, G., Brozek, J., et al. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 383–394.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures
Authors
C. A. C. Prinsen
L. B. Mokkink
L. M. Bouter
J. Alonso
D. L. Patrick
H. C. W. de Vet
C. B. Terwee
Publication date
01-05-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 5/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3

Other articles of this Issue 5/2018

Quality of Life Research 5/2018 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

The association of alcohol use and quality of life in depressed and non-depressed individuals: a cross-sectional general population study

OriginalPaper

Association of midlife value priorities with health-related quality of life, frailty and mortality among older men: a 26-year follow-up of the Helsinki Businessmen Study (HBS)

OriginalPaper

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

OriginalPaper

PROMIS depression measures perform similarly to legacy measures relative to a structured diagnostic interview for depression in cancer patients

OriginalPaper

Health-related quality of life among US military personnel injured in combat: findings from the Wounded Warrior Recovery Project

OriginalPaper

The relation between personality, informal caregiving, life satisfaction and health-related quality of life: evidence of a longitudinal study