ReviewBMC research notes2015
A critical review of scoring options for clinical measurement tools.
Review in BMC research notes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Measuring shared decision making in oncology: Development and first testing of the iSHAREpatient and iSHAREphysician questionnaires.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Pooled it
- Impact of weight on daily activities questionnaire in patients with overweight or obesity: Psychometric evaluation using data from the OASIS 1 trial.Clinical obesity · 2025Trial
- The COSMIN Clubs initiative: improving health measurement through collaborative learning.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Optimization of Xiaoer Lingyin granule formulation using single-factor and response surface methodology.RSC advances · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric validation of the Hair Health and Care Questionnaire (HHCQ): a KAP-based instrument for young adults.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties and clinical utility of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 in patients with bone metastases: a systematic review.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- The Development, Validity and Reliability of the Willingness of Prosocial Behavior Scale for Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using Classical Testing Theory.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
- National variation in acute kidney injury diagnosis and monitoring across adult intensive care units in china: a nationwide cross-sectional survey.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Predictors of osteoporosis self-efficacy among young and middle-aged female nurses based on self-efficacy theory and the health belief model: evidence from a tertiary hospital in Eastern China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Design and psychometric properties of the academic vitality scale in nursing students.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Measuring honesty in nursing: scale development and validation.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Development and Psychometric Properties of Ethical Competence Questionnaire for Nursing Students.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Scaling up frailty: psychometric validation of the functional limitations and geriatric syndromes frailty questionnaire-a new tool for uniformly classifying vulnerable hospital patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Detecting and classifying eco-anxiety: development of clinical cut-off scores for the climate change anxiety scale.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Therapy Intensity Level Scale for Traumatic Brain Injury: Clinimetric Assessment on Neuro-Monitored Patients Across 52 European Intensive Care Units.Journal of neurotrauma · 2024Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of the ethical conflict assessment instrument in nursing: A mixed-method protocol study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
- Design and validation of the presenteeism scale in nursing.BMC nursing · 2023Article
- Defining complexity in anaesthesia: description and validation of the Oxford Anaesthetic Complexity (OxAnCo) score.Anaesthesia · 2022Article
- Exploring the structural characteristics of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT) and ASCOT-Carer.NIHR open research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this paper is twofold: (1) to describe the fundamental differences between formative and reflective measurement models, and (2) to review the options proposed in the literature to obtain overall instrument summary scores, with a particular focus on formative models.
methodsAn extensive literature search was conducted using the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and ABI/INFORM, using "formative" and "reflective" as text words; relevant articles' reference lists were hand searched.
resultsReflective models are most frequently scored by means of simple summation, which is consistent with the theory underlying these models. However, our review suggests that formative models might be better summarized using weighted combinations of indicators, since each indicator captures unique features of the underlying construct. For this purpose, indicator weights have been obtained using choice-based, statistical, researcher-based, and combined approaches.
conclusionWhereas simple summation is a theoretically justified scoring system for reflective measurement models, formative measures likely benefit from the use of weighted scores that preserve the contribution of each of the aspects of the construct.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.