A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.

<h4>Background</h4>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient's health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear w...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Alberto Recchioni, Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi, Samantha Cruz-Rivera, Saaeha Rauz, Anita Slade
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/2893ab8acb11463dad086f7186a47c98
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:2893ab8acb11463dad086f7186a47c98
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:2893ab8acb11463dad086f7186a47c982021-12-02T20:15:07ZA systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0253857https://doaj.org/article/2893ab8acb11463dad086f7186a47c982021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0253857https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient's health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear whether the available PROMs were developed using comprehensive guidelines. To address this, we evaluated the methodological quality of studies assessing the psychometric properties of PROMs in DED and OSD [PROSPERO registration number CRD42019142328].<h4>Methods</h4>Four databases were searched; reference list and citation searching of included studies was also conducted. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to appraise the quality of the studies evaluating the psychometric properties of PROMs used in DED and OSD.<h4>Results</h4>The search strategy (S3 Table) retrieved 5,761 records, 573 duplicates were removed, 5,188 abstracts were screened and 127 full-text articles were retrieved for further review. Of these, 118 full-text articles did not meet the eligibility criteria and were excluded. Reference list and citation searching, identified an additional 8 articles bringing the total numbers of papers reviewed to 17. In general, psychometric properties such as content validity, measurement error and structural validity were not assessed by the studies included in this review. Studies reviewing The Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) presented with the highest quality scores together with the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The quality of studies evaluating PROMs in DED and OSD was considered using the COSMIN standards. The majority of the studies evaluating PROMs included in this review did not meet the recommended COSMIN criteria and the quality of the PROMs evaluated is not assured. Further evaluation of their psychometric properties is required if these are going to be used in clinical practice or research.Alberto RecchioniOlalekan Lee AiyegbusiSamantha Cruz-RiveraSaaeha RauzAnita SladePublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 8, p e0253857 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
description	<h4>Background</h4>Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide valuable insights on the impact of a disease or treatment on a patient's health-related quality of life. In ophthalmology, particularly in dry eye disease (DED) and ocular surface disease (OSD), it is unclear whether the available PROMs were developed using comprehensive guidelines. To address this, we evaluated the methodological quality of studies assessing the psychometric properties of PROMs in DED and OSD [PROSPERO registration number CRD42019142328].<h4>Methods</h4>Four databases were searched; reference list and citation searching of included studies was also conducted. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to appraise the quality of the studies evaluating the psychometric properties of PROMs used in DED and OSD.<h4>Results</h4>The search strategy (S3 Table) retrieved 5,761 records, 573 duplicates were removed, 5,188 abstracts were screened and 127 full-text articles were retrieved for further review. Of these, 118 full-text articles did not meet the eligibility criteria and were excluded. Reference list and citation searching, identified an additional 8 articles bringing the total numbers of papers reviewed to 17. In general, psychometric properties such as content validity, measurement error and structural validity were not assessed by the studies included in this review. Studies reviewing The Impact of Dry Eye on Everyday Life (IDEEL) presented with the highest quality scores together with the Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The quality of studies evaluating PROMs in DED and OSD was considered using the COSMIN standards. The majority of the studies evaluating PROMs included in this review did not meet the recommended COSMIN criteria and the quality of the PROMs evaluated is not assured. Further evaluation of their psychometric properties is required if these are going to be used in clinical practice or research.
format	article
author	Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade
author_facet	Alberto Recchioni Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi Samantha Cruz-Rivera Saaeha Rauz Anita Slade
author_sort	Alberto Recchioni
title	A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
title_short	A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
title_full	A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
title_fullStr	A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
title_full_unstemmed	A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
title_sort	systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/2893ab8acb11463dad086f7186a47c98
work_keys_str_mv	AT albertorecchioni asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT olalekanleeaiyegbusi asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT samanthacruzrivera asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT saaeharauz asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT anitaslade asystematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT albertorecchioni systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT olalekanleeaiyegbusi systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT samanthacruzrivera systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT saaeharauz systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases AT anitaslade systematicreviewassessingthequalityofpatientreportedoutcomesmeasuresindryeyediseases
_version_	1718374571773526016

A systematic review assessing the quality of patient reported outcomes measures in dry eye diseases.

Ejemplares similares