Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37383829›Full record

ArticleCampbell systematic reviews2023

PROTOCOL: Psychometric properties of instruments for measuring elder abuse and neglect in community and institutional settings: A systematic review.

Fadzilah Hanum Mohd Mydin, Christopher Mikton, Wan Yuen Choo, Ranita Hisham Shanmugam, Aja Murray, Yongjie Yon, Raudah Mohd Yunus, Noran Naqiah Hairi, Farizah Mohd Hairi, Marie Beaulieu and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Campbell systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 6 countries.

Fadzilah Hanum Mohd MydinDepartment of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4355-0120
Christopher MiktonDepartment of Social Determinants of Health World Health Organization Geneva Switzerland.
Wan Yuen ChooDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.
Ranita Hisham ShanmugamUniversiti Malaya Library Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.
Aja MurrayDepartment of Psychology University of Edinburgh Edinburgh United Kingdom.
Yongjie YonWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe Copenhagen Denmark.
Raudah Mohd YunusDepartment of Public Health Medicine Universiti Teknologi MARA Sungai Buloh Malaysia.
Noran Naqiah HairiDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.
Farizah Mohd HairiDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Universiti Malaya Kuala Lumpur Malaysia.
Marie BeaulieuFaculté des lettres et sciences humaines, École de travail social, Centre de recherche sur le vieillissement, CIUSSS Estrie-CHUS Université de Sherbrooke Québec Canada.
Amanda PhelanSchool of Nursing and Midwifery Trinity College Dublin Dublin Ireland.
University of Malaya · MYHospital Sungai Buloh · MYTrinity College Dublin · IEUniversité de Sherbrooke · CAUniversity of Edinburgh · GBWorld Health Organization · CHWorld Health Organization Regional Office for Europe · DK

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The psychometric properties of elder abuse measurement instruments have not been well-studied. Poor psychometric properties of elder abuse measurement instruments may contribute to the inconsistency of elder abuse prevalence estimates and uncertainty about the magnitude of the problem at the national, regional, and global levels. Objectives: The present review will utilise the COSMIN taxonomy on the quality of outcome measures to identify and review the instruments used in measuring elder abuse, assess the instrument's measurement properties, and identify the definitions of elder abuse and abuse subtypes measured by the instrument. Search Methods: Searches will be conducted in the following online databases: Ageline, ASSIA, CINAHL, CNKI, EMBASE, Google Scholar, LILACS, Proquest Dissertation & Theses Global, PsycINFO, PubMed, SciELO, Scopus, Sociological Abstract and WHO Index Medicus. Relevant studies will also be identified by searching the grey literature from several resources such as OpenAIRE, BASE, OISter and Age Concern NZPotential studies by searching the references of related reviews. We will contact experts who have conducted similar work or are currently conducting ongoing studies. Enquiries will also be sent to the relevant authors if any important data is missing, incomplete or unclear. Selection Criteria: All quantitative, qualitative (that address face and content validity), and mixed-method empirical studies published in peer-reviewed journals or the grey literature will be included in this review. Studies will be included if they are primary studies that (1) evaluate one or more psychometric properties; (2) contain information on instrument development, or (3) perform content validity of the instruments designed to measure elder abuse in the community or institutional settings. Studies should describe at least one of the psychometric properties, such as reliability, validity and responsiveness. Study participants represent the population of interest, including males and females aged 60 or older in community or institutional settings (i.e., nursing homes, long-term care facilities, assisted living, residential care institutions, and residential facilities). Data Collection and Analysis: Screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts of the selected studies will be evaluated based on the preset inclusion criteria by two reviewers. Two reviewers will be assessing the quality appraisal of each study using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist and the overall quality of evidence of each psychometric property of the instrument against the updated criteria of good measurement properties. Any dispute between the two reviewers will be resolved through discussions or consensus with a third reviewer. The overall quality of the measurement instrument will be graded using a modified GRADE approach. Data extraction will be performed using the data extraction forms adapted from the COSMIN Guideline for Systematic Reviews of Outcome Measurement Instruments. The information includes the characteristic of included instruments (name, adaptation, language used, translation and country of origin), characteristics of the tested population, psychometric properties listed in the COSMIN criteria, including details on the instrument development, content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, hypotheses testing for construct validity, responsiveness and interoperability. We will perform a meta-analysis to pool psychometric properties parameters (where possible) or summarise qualitatively.

Identifiers

PMID37383829
PMCPMC10296034
OpenAlexW4382450827

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.