Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39381238›Full record

ReviewHeliyon2024

Reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures in assessing knee osteoarthritis in the Chinese population: A systematic review.

Jiayi Ren, Hongyuan Lu, Hang Gao, Xinglai Zhang, Yongni Zhang, Jin Li, Haoxiang He, Jiming Tao

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Jiayi RenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.
Hongyuan LuDepartment of Spine, Guanghua Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 200052, PR China.
Hang GaoDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.
Xinglai ZhangDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.
Yongni ZhangDuquesne- China Health Institute, Duquesne University, United States.
Jin LiDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.
Haoxiang HeDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.
Jiming TaoDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Shanghai Shuguang Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, 201203, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a prevalent condition in China, necessitating effective assessment tools for treatment outcomes. This study systematically reviews and analyzes the reliability, validity, and selection of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for evaluating KOA. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was conducted across seven databases, including CNKI, PubMed, and Embase, covering publications from December 2012 to December 2022. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Results: Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, involving eight types of KOA PROMs. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were the most frequently utilized, appearing in nine and four studies, respectively. OKS achieved a "strong" rating in internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, responsiveness, and measurement error, while WOMAC received a "strong" rating in internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and content validity, with a "moderate" rating in structural validity. Conclusion: Both OKS and WOMAC are effective PROMs for evaluating KOA in China. However, the choice of a specific tool should be based on the study's objectives and the practical context, considering each tool's reliability, validity, and other measurement properties.

Indexed as

Knee osteoarthritisPatient-reported outcome measuresReliabilitySystematic reviewValidity

Identifiers

PMID39381238
PMCPMC11459052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.