Dataset Information

Quality appraisal of generic self-reported instruments measuring health-related productivity changes: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health impairments can result in disability and changed work productivity imposing considerable costs for the employee, employer and society as a whole. A large number of instruments exist to measure health-related productivity changes; however their methodological quality remains unclear. This systematic review critically appraised the measurement properties in generic self-reported instruments that measure health-related productivity changes to recommend appropriate instruments for use in occupational and economic health practice.

Methods

PubMed, PsycINFO, Econlit and Embase were systematically searched for studies whereof: (i) instruments measured health-related productivity changes; (ii) the aim was to evaluate instrument measurement properties; (iii) instruments were generic; (iv) ratings were self-reported; (v) full-texts were available. Next, methodological quality appraisal was based on COSMIN elements: (i) internal consistency; (ii) reliability; (iii) measurement error; (iv) content validity; (v) structural validity; (vi) hypotheses testing; (vii) cross-cultural validity; (viii) criterion validity; and (ix) responsiveness. Recommendations are based on evidence syntheses.

Results

This review included 25 articles assessing the reliability, validity and responsiveness of 15 different generic self-reported instruments measuring health-related productivity changes. Most studies evaluated criterion validity, none evaluated cross-cultural validity and information on measurement error is lacking. The Work Limitation Questionnaire (WLQ) was most frequently evaluated with moderate respectively strong positive evidence for content and structural validity and negative evidence for reliability, hypothesis testing and responsiveness. Less frequently evaluated, the Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS) showed strong positive evidence for internal consistency and structural validity, and moderate positive evidence for hypotheses testing and criterion validity. The Productivity and Disease Questionnaire (PRODISQ) yielded strong positive evidence for content validity, evidence for other properties is lacking. The other instruments resulted in mostly fair-to-poor quality ratings with limited evidence.

Conclusions

Decisions based on the content of the instrument, usage purpose, target country and population, and available evidence are recommended. Until high-quality studies are in place to accurately assess the measurement properties of the currently available instruments, the WLQ and, in a Dutch context, the PRODISQ are cautiously preferred based on its strong positive evidence for content validity. Based on its strong positive evidence for internal consistency and structural validity, the SPS is cautiously recommended.

SUBMITTER: Noben CY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3942271 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Quality appraisal of generic self-reported instruments measuring health-related productivity changes: a systematic review.

Noben Cindy Y G CY Evers Silvia M A A SM Nijhuis Frans J FJ de Rijk Angelique E AE

BMC public health 20140204

<h4>Background</h4>Health impairments can result in disability and changed work productivity imposing considerable costs for the employee, employer and society as a whole. A large number of instruments exist to measure health-related productivity changes; however their methodological quality remains unclear. This systematic review critically appraised the measurement properties in generic self-reported instruments that measure health-related productivity changes to recommend appropriate instrume ...[more]

PMID: 24495301

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHealth economic evaluations support the health care decision-making process by providing information on costs and consequences of health interventions. The quality of such studies is assessed by health economic evaluation (HEE) quality appraisal instruments. At present, there is no instrument for measuring and improving the quality of such HEE quality appraisal instruments. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to establish a framework for assessing the quality of HEE quality appraisal instruments to support and improve their quality, and to apply this framework to those HEE quality appraisal instruments which have been subject to more scrutiny than others, in order to test the framework and to demonstrate the shortcomings of existing HEE quality appraisal instruments.MethodsTo develop the quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments, the experiences of using appraisal tools for clinical guidelines are used. Based on a deductive iterative process, clinical guideline appraisal instruments identified through literature search are reviewed, consolidated, and adapted to produce the final quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments.ResultsThe final quality assessment framework for HEE quality appraisal instruments consists of 36 items organized within 7 dimensions, each of which captures a specific domain of quality. Applying the quality assessment framework to four existing HEE quality appraisal instruments, it is found that these four quality appraisal instruments are of variable quality.ConclusionsThe framework described in this study should be regarded as a starting point for appraising the quality of HEE quality appraisal instruments. This framework can be used by HEE quality appraisal instrument producers to support and improve the quality and acceptance of existing and future HEE quality appraisal instruments. By applying this framework, users of HEE quality appraisal instruments can become aware of methodological deficiencies inherent in existing HEE quality appraisal instruments. These shortcomings of existing HEE quality appraisal instruments are illustrated by the pilot test.

Project description:Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare genetic disease associated with significant disease burden and considerable impact on health-related quality of life (HRQL). Currently no disease-specific clinical outcome assessments evaluate HRQL in individuals with TSC. A multi-center phase III study EXIST-3 (NCT01713946) assessed the efficacy and safety of two trough exposure ranges (Low exposure, LE: 3-7 ng/mL and high exposure, HE: 9-15 ng/mL) of adjunctive everolimus in patients aged 2-65 years with TSC and refractory partial-onset seizures (N = 366). Three age-specific HRQL measures were included as secondary endpoints including: quality of life in childhood epilepsy (QOLCE; caregiver-report for aged 2- < 11), the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory for Adolescents-48 (QOLIE-AD-48; self-report, aged ? 11- < 18), and the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory-31-Problems (QOLIE-31-P; self-report, aged ? 18). Intellectual ability was evaluated using the Wechsler Non-Verbal (WNV) Scale of Ability. Post hoc analyses were performed on the core phase primary data from EXIST-3 to evaluate the psychometric properties of the HRQL measures and calculate meaningful change estimates. Results showed that a significant subset of the trial sample (4-21 year olds) scored in the intellectual disability range, as assessed by the WNV. Psychometric analyses of the three epilepsy measures (including reliability, validity, and ability to detect change) supported the appropriateness for use in TSC. Distribution-based meaningful change estimates were generated for each HRQL measure, with estimates for the QOLIE-31-P total score largely consistent with the published literature. To our knowledge, this is the first evaluation using clinical trial data to establish the psychometric properties of the QOLCE, QOLIE-AD-48, and QOLIE-31-P for use in individuals with TSC. These findings increase confidence in the measures as valid and reliable for use in clinical trials and future research in patients with TSC.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To integrate items from two widely used oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) questionnaires, the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) and the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP), as well as culturally-specific items of the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) into a four-dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. METHODS:Subjects came from an ancillary study of the Dimensions of Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Project (N=267 patients, mean age±SD: 54.0±17.2years, 58% women.) Patients filled in the original 49 items of OHIP and 22 additional OHRQoL items in a cross-sectional study. These additional items consisted of 7 culturally specific OHIP items and 15 GOHAI or OIDP items with unique content not covered in OHIP-49. Before data collection, three experts hypothesized to which of the four OHRQoL dimensions these items belong. Hypotheses were tested in correlation analyses between the 22 items and the four dimension scores that were derived from OHIP-49. RESULTS:Five of the 22 items did not provide sufficient information to which dimension they belong. In 16 of the remaining 17 items, the pattern of correlation coefficients fitted experts' a priori hypotheses. Acceptance of 16 of the 17 hypotheses was interpreted as evidence that additional (not in OHIP-49 contained) OHRQoL items can be assigned to Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CONCLUSION:Items of three OHRQoL instruments can be integrated into a dimensional OHRQoL model consisting of Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE:Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact can serve as a simple and clinically appealing set of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) dimensions and therefore provide an opportunity for simpler, but psychometrically improved OHRQoL measurement in the future.

Dataset Information

Quality appraisal of generic self-reported instruments measuring health-related productivity changes: a systematic review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Quality appraisal of generic self-reported instruments measuring health-related productivity changes: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets