Dataset Information

Systematic review of severity scales and screening instruments for tics: Critique and recommendations.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several clinician, informant, and self-report instruments for tics and associated phenomena have been developed that differ in construct, comprehensiveness, and ease of administration.

Objective

A Movement Disorders Society subcommittee aimed to rate psychometric quality of severity and screening instruments for tics and related sensory phenomena.

Methods

Following the methodology adopted by previous Movement Disorders Society subcommittee papers, a review of severity and screening instruments for tics was completed, applying a classification as "recommended," "suggested," or "listed" to each instrument.

Results

A total of 5 severity scales (Yale Global Tic Severity Scale, Tourette Syndrome Clinical Global Impression, Tourette's Disorder Scale, Shapiro Tourette syndrome Severity Scale, Premonitory Urges for Tics Scale) were "recommended," and 6 (Rush Video-Based Tic Rating Scale, Motor tic, Obsessions and compulsions, Vocal tic Evaluation Survey, Tourette Syndrome Global Scale, Global Tic Rating Scale, Parent Tic Questionnaire, Tourette Syndrome Symptom List) were "suggested." A total of 2 screening instruments (Motor tic, Obsession and compulsions, Vocal tic Evaluation Survey and Autism-Tics, Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Other Comorbidities Inventory) were "recommended," whereas 2 others (Apter 4-questions screening and Proxy Report Questionnaire for Parents and Teachers) were "suggested."

Conclusions

Our review does not support the need for developing new tic severity or screening instruments. Potential objectives of future research include developing a rating instrument targeting the full spectrum of tic-related abnormal behaviors, assessing/screening malignant forms of tic disorders, and developing patient-reported outcome measures. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

SUBMITTER: Martino D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5482361 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of severity scales and screening instruments for tics: Critique and recommendations.

Martino Davide D Pringsheim Tamara M TM Cavanna Andrea E AE Colosimo Carlo C Hartmann Andreas A Leckman James F JF Luo Sheng S Munchau Alexander A Goetz Christopher G CG Stebbins Glenn T GT Martinez-Martin Pablo P

Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society 20170110 3

<h4>Background</h4>Several clinician, informant, and self-report instruments for tics and associated phenomena have been developed that differ in construct, comprehensiveness, and ease of administration.<h4>Objective</h4>A Movement Disorders Society subcommittee aimed to rate psychometric quality of severity and screening instruments for tics and related sensory phenomena.<h4>Methods</h4>Following the methodology adopted by previous Movement Disorders Society subcommittee papers, a review of sev ...[more]

PMID: 28071825

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Permanent childhood hearing loss is one of the most common birth conditions associated with speech and language delay. A hearing screening can result in early detection and intervention for hearing loss. OBJECTIVES:To update and expand previous systematic reviews of economic evaluations of childhood hearing screening strategies, and explore the methodological differences. DATA SOURCES:MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane database, National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, and Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health's (CADTH) Grey matters. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS:Economic evaluations reporting costs and outcomes for both the intervention and comparator arms related to childhood hearing screening strategies. RESULTS:Thirty evaluations (from 29 articles) were included for review. Several methodological issues were identified, including: few evaluations reported outcomes in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs); none estimated utilities directly from surveying children; none included disutilities and costs associated with adverse events; few included costs and outcomes that differed by severity; few included long-term estimates; none considered acquired hearing loss; some did not present incremental results; and few conducted comprehensive univariate or probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Evaluations published post-2011 were more likely to report QALYs and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as outcome measures, include long-term treatment and productivity costs, and present incremental results. LIMITATIONS:We were unable to access the economic models and, although we employed an extensive search strategy, potentially not all relevant economic evaluations were identified. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS:Most economic evaluations concluded that childhood hearing screening is value for money. However, there were significant methodological limitations with the evaluations.

Project description:Importance:Measurement of delirium severity has been recognized as highly important for tracking prognosis, monitoring response to treatment, and estimating burden of care for patients both during and after hospitalization. Rather than simply rating delirium as present or absent, the ability to quantify its severity would enable development and monitoring of more effective treatment approaches for the condition. Objectives:To present a comprehensive review of delirium severity instruments, conduct a methodologic quality rating of the original validation study of the most commonly used instruments, and select a group of top-rated instruments. Evidence Review:This systematic review was conducted using literature from Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, from January 1, 1974, through March 31, 2017, with the key words delirium, severity, tests, measures, and intensity. Inclusion criteria were original articles assessing delirium severity and using a delirium-specific severity instrument. Final listings of articles were supplemented with hand searches of reference listings to ensure completeness. At least 2 reviewers independently completed each step of the review process: article selection, data extraction, and methodologic quality assessment of relevant articles using a validated rating scale. All discrepancies between raters were resolved by consensus. Findings:Of 9409 articles identified, 228 underwent full text review, and we identified 42 different instruments of delirium severity. Eleven of the 42 tools were multidomain, delirium-specific instruments providing a quantitative rating of delirium severity; these instruments underwent a methodologic quality review. Applying prespecified criteria related to frequency of use, methodologic quality, construct or predictive validity, and broad domain coverage, an expert panel used an iterative modified Delphi process to select 6 final high-quality instruments meeting these criteria: the Confusion Assessment Method-Severity Score, Confusional State Examination, Delirium-O-Meter, Delirium Observation Scale, Delirium Rating Scale, and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale. Conclusions and Relevance:The 6 instruments identified may enable accurate measurement of delirium severity to improve clinical care for patients with this condition. This work may stimulate increased usage and head-to-head comparison of these instruments.

Project description:The Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) is a graph representing causal pathways for informing the conduct of an observational study. The use of DAGs allows transparent communication of a causal model between researchers and can prevent over-adjustment biases when conducting causal inference, permitting greater confidence and transparency in reported causal estimates. In the era of 'big data' and increasing number of observational studies, the role of the DAG is becoming more important. Recent best-practice guidance for constructing a DAG with reference to the literature has been published in the 'Evidence synthesis for constructing DAGs' (ESC-DAG) protocol. We aimed to assess adherence to these principles for DAGs constructed within perioperative literature. Following registration on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and with adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting framework for systematic reviews, we searched the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase), the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Cochrane databases for perioperative observational research incorporating a DAG. Nineteen studies were included in the final synthesis. No studies demonstrated any evidence of following the mapping stage of the protocol. Fifteen (79%) fulfilled over half of the translation and integration one stages of the protocol. Adherence with one stage did not guarantee fulfilment of the other. Two studies (11%) undertook the integration two stage. Unmeasured variables were handled inconsistently between studies. Only three (16%) studies included unmeasured variables within their DAG and acknowledged their implication within the main text. Overall, DAGs that were constructed for use in perioperative observational literature did not consistently adhere to best practice, potentially limiting the benefits of subsequent causal inference. Further work should focus on exploring reasons for this deviation and increasing methodological transparency around DAG construction.

Dataset Information

Systematic review of severity scales and screening instruments for tics: Critique and recommendations.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Systematic review of severity scales and screening instruments for tics: Critique and recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets