Wheeled mobility use outcomes: a systematic review protocol of measurement properties.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES JBI evidence synthesis Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.11124/JBIES-22-00427
Kiera Mendoza, Madison Loeser, Béatrice Ouellet, Krista L Best, Paula W Rushton, Lisa K Kenyon, Rachel J Hinrichs, Tony Chase
{"title":"Wheeled mobility use outcomes: a systematic review protocol of measurement properties.","authors":"Kiera Mendoza, Madison Loeser, Béatrice Ouellet, Krista L Best, Paula W Rushton, Lisa K Kenyon, Rachel J Hinrichs, Tony Chase","doi":"10.11124/JBIES-22-00427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Numerous tools have been developed to measure constructs related to wheelchair use. Currently, no toolkit comprehensively details assessments of wheeled mobility device use based on the quality of their measurement properties. The current review aims to systematically identify high-quality assessment tools that measure different aspects of wheeled mobility use.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objectives are two-fold: i) to synthesize outcome measures that assess use of wheeled mobility devices, and ii) to evaluate measurement properties of the assessment tools.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>The populations of interest are manual wheelchair users, power wheelchair users, and scooter users of any age, diagnosis, or setting. Instruments of any type will be included.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The JBI methodology for systematic reviews of measurement properties will guide this review. A search strategy will be developed to search the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), PsycTests (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The article selection process, data extraction, and quality appraisal will be performed by 2 independent reviewers, with a third reviewer being consulted to achieve consensus. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed through the Consensus Standards for the Selection of Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias tool and the COSMIN Checklist. The quality of the pooled evidence and individual measurement properties will be graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the COSMIN Criteria for Good Measurement Properties recommendations. Measurement properties of each instrument will be described, with the goal of developing a toolkit that identifies appropriate assessment tools for wheeled mobility use outcomes.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD4202276169.</p>","PeriodicalId":36399,"journal":{"name":"JBI evidence synthesis","volume":" ","pages":"1898-1905"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11382825/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBI evidence synthesis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-22-00427","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Numerous tools have been developed to measure constructs related to wheelchair use. Currently, no toolkit comprehensively details assessments of wheeled mobility device use based on the quality of their measurement properties. The current review aims to systematically identify high-quality assessment tools that measure different aspects of wheeled mobility use.

Objective: The objectives are two-fold: i) to synthesize outcome measures that assess use of wheeled mobility devices, and ii) to evaluate measurement properties of the assessment tools.

Inclusion criteria: The populations of interest are manual wheelchair users, power wheelchair users, and scooter users of any age, diagnosis, or setting. Instruments of any type will be included.

Method: The JBI methodology for systematic reviews of measurement properties will guide this review. A search strategy will be developed to search the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (EBSCOhost), PsycTests (EBSCOhost), Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The article selection process, data extraction, and quality appraisal will be performed by 2 independent reviewers, with a third reviewer being consulted to achieve consensus. The methodological quality of the studies will be assessed through the Consensus Standards for the Selection of Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias tool and the COSMIN Checklist. The quality of the pooled evidence and individual measurement properties will be graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the COSMIN Criteria for Good Measurement Properties recommendations. Measurement properties of each instrument will be described, with the goal of developing a toolkit that identifies appropriate assessment tools for wheeled mobility use outcomes.

Review registration: PROSPERO CRD4202276169.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
轮式移动能力使用结果:测量属性协议的系统性回顾。
导言:目前已开发出许多工具来测量与轮椅使用相关的结构。目前,还没有一套工具包能根据其测量属性的质量全面详细地评估轮椅移动设备的使用情况。本综述旨在系统性地确定高质量的评估工具,以测量轮椅移动能力使用的不同方面:目的有二:(1)综合评估轮式助行器具使用情况的结果测量,(2)评估评估工具的测量特性:纳入标准:相关人群包括手动轮椅使用者、电动轮椅使用者以及任何年龄、诊断或环境的代步车使用者。方法:方法:将采用 JBI 方法对测量特性进行系统性回顾。将制定搜索策略,搜索以下数据库:MEDLINE (Ovid)、Embase、CINAHL (EBSCOhost)、PsycINFO (EBSCOhost)、PsycTests (EBSCOhost)、Web of Science 和 Google Scholar。文章筛选过程、数据提取和质量评估将由两位独立审稿人完成,并征求第三位审稿人的意见以达成共识。研究的方法学质量将通过测量工具选择共识标准(COSMIN)偏倚风险工具和 COSMIN 核对表进行评估。将采用建议评估、开发和评价分级法(GRADE)和 COSMIN 良好测量特性建议标准对汇总证据和单项测量特性的质量进行分级。将对每种工具的测量特性进行描述,目的是开发一个工具包,为轮式移动能力使用结果确定合适的评估工具:prospero:CRD4202276169。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JBI evidence synthesis
JBI evidence synthesis Nursing-Nursing (all)
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
218
期刊最新文献
Value-based outcome evaluation methods used by occupational therapists in primary care: a scoping review. Parents' and guardians' experiences of barriers and facilitators in accessing autism spectrum disorder diagnostic services for their children: a qualitative systematic review. Evidence on the accreditation of health professionals' education in the WHO Africa region: a scoping review protocol. Barriers and facilitators to designing, maintaining, and utilizing rare disease patient registries: a scoping review protocol. Supporting professional practice transition in undergraduate nursing education: a scoping review protocol.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1