Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31549367›Full record

SynthesisQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2020

Outcome measurement instruments for peripheral vascular malformations and an assessment of the measurement properties: a systematic review.

Sophie E R Horbach, Amber P M Rongen, Roy G Elbers, Chantal M A M van der Horst, Cecilia A C Prinsen, Phyllis I Spuls, Collaborators OVAMA consensus group

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sophie E R HorbachDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.e.horbach@amsterdamumc.nl.
Amber P M RongenDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Roy G ElbersDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Chantal M A M van der HorstDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Cecilia A C PrinsenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Phyllis I SpulsDepartment of Dermatology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Collaborators OVAMA consensus group
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Outcome measures for vascular malformation (OVAMA) group reached consensus on the core outcome domains for the core outcome set (COS) for peripheral vascular malformations (venous, lymphatic and arteriovenous malformations). However, it is unclear which instruments should be used to measure these domains. Therefore, our aims were to identify all outcome measurement instruments available for vascular malformations, and to evaluate their measurement properties.

methodsWith the first literature search, we identified outcomes and instruments previously used in prospective studies on vascular malformations. A second search yielded studies on measurement properties of patient- and physician-reported instruments that were either developed for vascular malformations, or used in prospective studies. If the latter instruments were not specifically validated for vascular malformations, we performed a third search for studies on measurement properties in clinically similar diseases (vascular or lymphatic diseases and benign tumors). We assessed the methodological quality of these studies following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments methodology, and evaluated the quality of the measurement properties.

resultsThe first search yielded 27 studies, none using disease-specific instruments. The second and third search included 22 development and/or validation studies, concerning six instruments. Only the Lymphatic Malformation Function Instrument was developed specifically for vascular malformations. Other instruments were generic QoL instruments developed and/or partly validated for clinically similar diseases.

conclusionsAdditional research on measurement properties is needed to assess which instruments may be included in the COS. This review informs the instrument selection and/or the development of new instruments. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, 42017056242.

Indexed as

HumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareProspective StudiesVascular MalformationsInterpretabilityMeasurement propertiesOutcome instrumentsOutcome measurement instrumentsPatient reportedPhysician reportedPROMsReliabilityResponsivenessValidityVascular malformations

Identifiers

PMID31549367
PMCPMC6962285
OpenAlexW2976806239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.