Article

AIM: To identify and appraise the quality of studies that primarily assessed the
measurement properties of English language versions of multidimensional
patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) when evaluated with children with
neurodisability, and to summarize this evidence. METHOD: MEDLINE, Embase,
PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation
Database were searched.
The methodological quality of the papers was assessed
using the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement
INstruments checklist. Evidence of content validity, construct validity, internal
consistency, test-retest reliability, proxy reliability, responsiveness, and
precision was extracted and judged against standardized reference criteria.
RESULTS: We identified 48 studies of mostly fair to good methodological quality:
37 papers for seven generic PROMs (CHIP, CHQ, CQoL, KIDSCREEN, PedsQL, SLSS, and
YQOL), seven papers for two chronic-generic PROMs (DISABKIDS and Neuro-QOL), and
four papers for three preference-based measures (HUI, EQ-5D-Y, and CHSCS-PS).
INTERPRETATION: On the basis of this appraisal, the DISABKIDS appears to have
more supportive evidence in samples of children with neurodisability. The overall
lack of evidence for responsiveness and measurement error is a concern when using
these instruments to measure change, or to interpret the findings of studies in
which these PROMs have been used to assess change.
CI - (c) 2015 University of Exeter. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology published
by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Mac Keith Press.

Langue : ANGLAIS