The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement...

28
The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments Wieneke Mokkink, Caroline Terwee, Paul Stratford, Jordi Alonso, Donald Patrick, Dirk Knol, Lex Bouter, Riekie de Vet

description

The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments. Wieneke Mokkink, Caroline Terwee, Paul Stratford, Jordi Alonso, Donald Patrick, Dirk Knol, Lex Bouter, Riekie de Vet. Outline presentation. Background Methodological guidelines - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement...

Page 1: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

The COSMIN studyCOnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Wieneke Mokkink, Caroline Terwee, Paul Stratford, Jordi Alonso, Donald Patrick, Dirk Knol, Lex Bouter, Riekie de Vet

Page 2: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Outline presentation

• Background– Methodological guidelines

• COSMIN Delphi Study– Purpose– Methods– Preliminary results

Page 3: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Why methodological guidelines?

Importance of high-quality studies- Detection of potential bias that may influence the results

- Better and more realistic estimates of results- Greater acceptance of results in health care community

Moher et al. Controlled Clinical Trials 1995;16:62-73

Page 4: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Accepted guidelines

• RCT: Delphi List (Verhagen et al.)• Diagnostic research: QUADAS

Page 5: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Why a new guideline?

• Several checklists for measurement properties exist (SAC MOS/Lohr, Bombardier & Tugwell, Andresen, Terwee)

• No consensus on terminilogy and defintions• None is generally accepted and widely used• Most chance of getting enough support is by

developing a checklist in an international consensus study, i.e. a Delphi Study

Page 6: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Aim of the COSMIN study

1. Which measurements properties should be included in the assessment of evaluative HR-PROs, and how should they be defined?

2. How should these measurement properties be assessed in terms of study design and statistical analysis? (i.e. standards)

Available as a checklist

Page 7: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Methods (1)

• International Delphi study• Steering committee• Background panel members:

– clinical medicine– biostatistics– psychology (psychometrics)– epidemiology (clinimetrics)

Page 8: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Methods (2)

Design delphi rounds:• Four written rounds

– which measurement properties (term and definitions)– how selected properties should be assessed (standards)– achieve consensus on complete checklist

• 5 point scale + arguments and comments– strongly disagree/disagree/no opinion/agree/strongly agree

• Consensus: ≥67% (strongly) agreed

Page 9: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Focus of COSMIN

HR-PRO instruments used in an evaluative application• PRO: endpoint derived from patient report• HR: not adherence or satisfaction with care

Page 10: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Flow chart

Invited: N=91

Agreed to participate: N=57

Page 11: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Flow chart

Invited: N=91

Agreed to participate: N=57

Round 1: N=57

Round 2: N=54

Round 3: N=52

Round 4: N=51

Responses: N=42 (74%)

Responses: N=31 (58%)

Responses: N=25 (48%)

Responses: N=27 (53%)

Drop out: N=3

Drop out: N=2

Drop out: N=1

Page 12: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Products of COSMIN

• Taxonomy (consensus on terms and definitions)• COSMIN checklist

Page 13: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments
Page 14: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments
Page 15: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Reliability

Page 16: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments
Page 17: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Content validity Construct validity Criterion validity

face validity

concurrent validity

predictive validity

cross-cultural validity†

hypotheses testing,e.g. convergent validity,

divergent validity, known group validity

structural validity*

* necessary for multi-item instruments, † necessary for cross-cultural comparison

Validity

Page 18: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments
Page 19: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Responsiveness

Page 20: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Results (2) Structure COSMIN checklist

3 Sections:- Descriptive information about the HR-PRO

instrument- Descriptive information about a study of a

measurement property- Evaluation of methodological quality of studies of

measurement properties, i.e. standards

Page 21: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Section 1

Descriptive information of the HR-PRO instrument• Development process• Format• Translation process• Interpretability

Page 22: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Example (1)

Page 23: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Section 2

Descriptive information of the study • IRT study

Page 24: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Example (2)

Page 25: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Section 3

Evaluation of methodological quality of the studies

• Term• Definition• Standard

– design requirement– statistical analysis

Page 26: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Standard for internal consistency

Page 27: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Future

• Selecting an HR-PRO instrument– Content– Practical issues– Measurement properties

• Standards

• Criteria of adequacy for good measurement properties

• Inter-rater reliability study of COSMIN checklist

Page 28: The COSMIN study COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

Many thanks to …

Neil Aaronson Linda Abetz Elena Andresen Dorcas Beaton Martijn Berger Giorgio Bertolotti Monika Bullinger David Cella Joost Dekker Dominique Dubois Anne Evers Diane Fairclough David Feeny Raymond Fitzpatrick Andrew Garratt Francis Guillemin Dennis Hart Graeme Hawthorne Ron Hays Elizabeth Juniper Robert Kane Donna Lamping

Marissa Lassere Matthew Liang Kathleen LohrPatrick Marquis Chris McCarthy Elaine McColl Ian McDowell Don Mellenbergh Mauro Niero Geoffrey Norman Manoj Pandey Luis Rajmil Bryce Reeve Dennis Revicki Margaret Rothman Mirjam Sprangers David Streiner Gerold Stucki Giulio Vidotto Sharon Wood-Dauphinee Albert Wu