A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases
<h4>Background</h4> Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient’s health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear wheth...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8351938/?tool=EBI |
id |
doaj-45c5852b52634356aaf09b5eb9dcee4a |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-45c5852b52634356aaf09b5eb9dcee4a2021-08-12T04:30:59ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032021-01-01168A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseasesAlberto RecchioniOlalekan Lee AiyegbusiSamantha Cruz-RiveraSaaeha RauzAnita Slade<h4>Background</h4> Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient’s health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear whether the available PROMs were developed using comprehensive guidelines. To address this, we evaluated the methodological quality of studies assessing the psychometric properties of PROMs in DED and OSD [PROSPERO registration number CRD42019142328]. <h4>Methods</h4> Four databases were searched; reference list and citation searching of included studies was also conducted. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to appraise the quality of the studies evaluating the psychometric properties of PROMs used in DED and OSD. <h4>Results</h4> The search strategy (S3 Table) retrieved 5,761 records, 573 duplicates were removed, 5,188 abstracts were screened and 127 full-text articles were retrieved for further review. Of these, 118 full-text articles did not meet the eligibility criteria and were excluded. Reference list and citation searching, identified an additional 8 articles bringing the total numbers of papers reviewed to 17. In general, psychometric properties such as content validity, measurement error and structural validity were not assessed by the studies included in this review. Studies reviewing The Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) presented with the highest quality scores together with the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. <h4>Conclusions</h4> The quality of studies evaluating PROMs in DED and OSD was considered using the COSMIN standards. The majority of the studies evaluating PROMs included in this review did not meet the recommended COSMIN criteria and the quality of the PROMs evaluated is not assured. Further evaluation of their psychometric properties is required if these are going to be used in clinical practice or research.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8351938/?tool=EBI |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade |
spellingShingle |
Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade |
author_sort |
Alberto Recchioni |
title |
A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
title_short |
A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
title_full |
A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
title_fullStr |
A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
title_full_unstemmed |
A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
title_sort |
systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2021-01-01 |
description |
<h4>Background</h4> Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient’s health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear whether the available PROMs were developed using comprehensive guidelines. To address this, we evaluated the methodological quality of studies assessing the psychometric properties of PROMs in DED and OSD [PROSPERO registration number CRD42019142328]. <h4>Methods</h4> Four databases were searched; reference list and citation searching of included studies was also conducted. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to appraise the quality of the studies evaluating the psychometric properties of PROMs used in DED and OSD. <h4>Results</h4> The search strategy (S3 Table) retrieved 5,761 records, 573 duplicates were removed, 5,188 abstracts were screened and 127 full-text articles were retrieved for further review. Of these, 118 full-text articles did not meet the eligibility criteria and were excluded. Reference list and citation searching, identified an additional 8 articles bringing the total numbers of papers reviewed to 17. In general, psychometric properties such as content validity, measurement error and structural validity were not assessed by the studies included in this review. Studies reviewing The Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) presented with the highest quality scores together with the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire. <h4>Conclusions</h4> The quality of studies evaluating PROMs in DED and OSD was considered using the COSMIN standards. The majority of the studies evaluating PROMs included in this review did not meet the recommended COSMIN criteria and the quality of the PROMs evaluated is not assured. Further evaluation of their psychometric properties is required if these are going to be used in clinical practice or research. |
url |
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8351938/?tool=EBI |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT albertorecchioni asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT olalekanleeaiyegbusi asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT samanthacruzrivera asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT saaeharauz asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT anitaslade asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT albertorecchioni systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT olalekanleeaiyegbusi systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT samanthacruzrivera systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT saaeharauz systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT anitaslade systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases |
_version_ |
1721209963991269376 |