ReviewBMJ open2020
Tools to assess the measurement properties of quality of life instruments: a meta-review.
Review in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 7 of them syntheses 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- COSMIN systematic review of stigma measurement in smoking, COPD, and lung cancer: content analysis, language audit, and psychometrics.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Associations between meeting 24-hour movement guidelines and health-related quality of life in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy of exercise intervention for atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Properties of Measurements of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Physical Activity Assessment in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review.Physiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy · 2025Pooled it
- Measuring health-related quality of life in Africa: a systematic review of validated disease-specific and generic measurement tools.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Pooled it
- Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024Guideline
- Pooled it
- Involving adult inpatients, family, partners and/or carers in measuring and monitoring patient safety in acute care hospitals: Protocol for an umbrella review.HRB open research · 2026Article
- Structured missingness in biomedical research.Communications AI & computing · 2026Article
- A cross-sectional observational study of quality of life in adult short bowel syndrome patients: What role does autologous gut reconstruction play?Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2025Observational
- Article
- Patient-reported outcome measures in pediatrics: An overview of reviews.Pediatric discovery · 2024Review
- Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
- Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs): PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2024Article
- Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of the Malay Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (M-SPADI) for Patients with Shoulder Pain.Malaysian orthopaedic journal · 2023Article
- Assessing independence in mobility activities in trauma care: Validity and reliability of the Activity Independence Measure-Trauma (AIM-T) in humanitarian settings.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Study protocol for developing, piloting and disseminating the PRISMA-COSMIN guideline: a new reporting guideline for systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments.Systematic reviews · 2022Article
- Article
- Dental patient reported outcome and oral health-related quality of life measures: protocol for a systematic evidence map of reviews.BDJ open · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis meta-review aims to discuss the methodological, research and practical applications of tools that assess the measurement properties of instruments evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQoL) that have been reported in systematic reviews.
designMeta-review.
methodsElectronic search from January 2008 to May 2020 was carried out on PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, WoS, Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) database, Google Scholar and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.
resultsA total of 246 systematic reviews were assessed. Concerning the quality of the review process, some methodological shortcomings were found, such as poor compliance with reporting or methodological guidelines. Regarding the procedures to assess the quality of measurement properties, 164 (66.6%) of reviewers applied one tool at least. Tool format and structure differed across standards or scientific traditions (ie, psychology, medicine and economics), but most assess both measurement properties and the usability of instruments. As far as the results and conclusions of systematic reviews are concerned, only 68 (27.5%) linked the intended use of the instrument to specific measurement properties (eg, evaluative use to responsiveness).
conclusionsThe reporting and methodological quality of reviews have increased over time, but there is still room for improvement regarding adherence to guidelines. The COSMIN would be the most widespread and comprehensive tool to assess both the risk of bias of primary studies, and the measurement properties of HRQoL instruments for evaluative purposes. Our analysis of other assessment tools and measurement standards can serve as a starting point for future lines of work on the COSMIN tool, such as considering a more comprehensive evaluation of feasibility, including burden and fairness; expanding its scope for measurement instruments with a different use than evaluative; and improving its assessment of the risk of bias of primary studies. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017065232.
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.