COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)

Lidwine B Mokkink, C Prinsen, Donald L Patrick, Jordi Alonso, LexM Bouter, HC De Vet, Caroline B Terwee, L Mokkink
2018-02-01
Abstract:Research performed with outcome measurement instruments of poor or unknown quality constitutes a waste of resources and is unethical (3). Unfortunately this practice is widespread (4). Selecting the best outcome measurement instrument for the outcome of interest in a methodologically sound way requires:(1) high quality studies that document the evaluation of the measurement properties (in total nine different aspects of reliability, validity, and responsiveness) of relevant outcome measurement instruments in the target population; and (2) a high quality systematic review of studies on measurement properties in which all information is gathered and evaluated in a systematic and transparent way, accompanied by clear recommendations for the most suitable available outcome measurement instrument. However, conducting such a systematic review is quite complex and time consuming, and it requires expertise within the research team on the construct to be measured, on the patient population, and on the methodology of studies of measurement properties.High quality systematic reviews can provide a comprehensive overview of the measurement properties of Patient‐Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and supports evidence‐based recommendations in the selection of the most suitable PROM for a given purpose. For example, for selecting the most suitable PROM for an outcome included in a core outcome set (COS)(5). These systematic reviews can also identify gaps in knowledge on the measurement properties of PROMs, which can be used to design new studies on measurement properties.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?