SynthesisBMJ open2025
Systematic review on the measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for measuring well-being in young children.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review aims to summarise and assess the measurement properties of existing instruments for measuring child well-being.
designA systematic review of measurement properties following the COnsensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guideline and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology was performed. DATA SOURCES: A search was performed in PubMed, Medline Complete, CINAHL Plus, Psychology & Behavioral Sciences (via EBSCOHost) and GoogleScholar (last search August 2024). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: This review focused on studies that evaluated the measurement properties of instruments to measure the well-being of children ages 2-7 years, published between 2000 and 2023. We excluded studies that used the child well-being instrument as an outcome measure or to validate another instrument. RISK OF BIAS AND DATA SYNTHESIS: The methodological quality of eligible studies was evaluated using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, the measurement properties of the instruments per study were assessed using the updated criteria for good measurement properties and an overall rating for the measurement property of each instrument is determined and compared against the criteria for good measurement properties. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach, and measurement recommendations were formulated. Results were presented using a narrative synthesis and tables.
resultsThree measures from three studies were included, and they presented moderate to high quality evidence for structural validity, internal consistency and construct validity. However, limited evidence was available for content validity.
conclusionFew instruments to measure the well-being of children aged 2-7 years are available, and only three measurement properties were fully evaluated in these studies. This review was conducted even if there was incomplete or unavailable information regarding their content validity. Further research is recommended before these measures may be recommended for use. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023428953.
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.