评估膀胱过度活动症严重程度的临床工具:心理测量学特性系统回顾。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Clinical Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1177/02692155231225662
Mohammed Usman Ali, Stanley John Winser, Priya Kannan, Georg S Kranz, Kenneth Nai-Kuen Fong
{"title":"评估膀胱过度活动症严重程度的临床工具:心理测量学特性系统回顾。","authors":"Mohammed Usman Ali, Stanley John Winser, Priya Kannan, Georg S Kranz, Kenneth Nai-Kuen Fong","doi":"10.1177/02692155231225662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically evaluate the evidence describing the psychometric properties of clinical measures for assessing overactive bladder symptoms (urinary urgency with or without urge urinary incontinence, urinary frequency and nocturia). To evaluate the quality of this evidence-base using the COnsensus-based Standards for selecting health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Five electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science) were searched from dataset inception to August 2023.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Study screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by two independent authors. Inclusion criteria were studies testing one or more psychometric properties of clinical tools for the assessment of overactive bladder symptoms among adults aged 18 years and older for both sexes. The methodological quality and quality of the evidence were evaluated using the COSMIN checklist and GRADE tools, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 40 studies totalling 10,634 participants evaluating the psychometric properties of 15 clinical tools. The COSMIN methodological quality was rated good for most measures, and the GRADE quality of evidence ranged from low (13%) to high (33%). The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score were of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence qualities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and the Neurogenic Bladder Symptoms Score are promising psychometrically sound measures. The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score has been applied to the most culturally diverse populations supported by studies of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"636-646"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical tools for evaluating the severity of overactive bladder: A systematic review of psychometric properties.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed Usman Ali, Stanley John Winser, Priya Kannan, Georg S Kranz, Kenneth Nai-Kuen Fong\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692155231225662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To systematically evaluate the evidence describing the psychometric properties of clinical measures for assessing overactive bladder symptoms (urinary urgency with or without urge urinary incontinence, urinary frequency and nocturia). To evaluate the quality of this evidence-base using the COnsensus-based Standards for selecting health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Five electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science) were searched from dataset inception to August 2023.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Study screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by two independent authors. Inclusion criteria were studies testing one or more psychometric properties of clinical tools for the assessment of overactive bladder symptoms among adults aged 18 years and older for both sexes. The methodological quality and quality of the evidence were evaluated using the COSMIN checklist and GRADE tools, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search identified 40 studies totalling 10,634 participants evaluating the psychometric properties of 15 clinical tools. The COSMIN methodological quality was rated good for most measures, and the GRADE quality of evidence ranged from low (13%) to high (33%). The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score were of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence qualities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and the Neurogenic Bladder Symptoms Score are promising psychometrically sound measures. The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score has been applied to the most culturally diverse populations supported by studies of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"636-646\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155231225662\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155231225662","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的系统评估用于评估膀胱过度活动症状(尿急伴有或不伴有急迫性尿失禁、尿频和夜尿)的临床测量方法的心理测量特性的证据。使用基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准(COSMIN)核对表和建议、评估、发展和评价分级(GRADE)工具评估该证据库的质量:检索了从数据集开始到 2023 年 8 月的五个电子数据库(CINAHL、EMBASE、MEDLINE、Scopus 和 Web of Science):研究筛选、数据提取和质量评估由两位独立作者完成。纳入标准是测试用于评估 18 岁及以上男女成年人膀胱过度活动症状的临床工具的一种或多种心理测量特性的研究。研究方法的质量和证据的质量分别采用 COSMIN 检查表和 GRADE 工具进行评估:搜索发现了 40 项研究,共有 10,634 人参与,对 15 种临床工具的心理测量特性进行了评估。大多数测量方法的 COSMIN 方法质量被评为良好,GRADE 证据质量从低(13%)到高(33%)不等。膀胱过度活动症状评分、膀胱过度活动问卷和神经源性膀胱症状评分的方法学质量良好,GRADE证据质量较高:结论:膀胱过度活动症评分、膀胱过度活动症问卷和神经源性膀胱症状评分在心理计量学上是很有前途的测量方法。膀胱过度活动症状评分已被应用于文化最多样化的人群,并得到了方法学研究和高GRADE证据质量的支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Clinical tools for evaluating the severity of overactive bladder: A systematic review of psychometric properties.

Objectives: To systematically evaluate the evidence describing the psychometric properties of clinical measures for assessing overactive bladder symptoms (urinary urgency with or without urge urinary incontinence, urinary frequency and nocturia). To evaluate the quality of this evidence-base using the COnsensus-based Standards for selecting health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tools.

Data sources: Five electronic databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science) were searched from dataset inception to August 2023.

Review methods: Study screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed by two independent authors. Inclusion criteria were studies testing one or more psychometric properties of clinical tools for the assessment of overactive bladder symptoms among adults aged 18 years and older for both sexes. The methodological quality and quality of the evidence were evaluated using the COSMIN checklist and GRADE tools, respectively.

Results: The search identified 40 studies totalling 10,634 participants evaluating the psychometric properties of 15 clinical tools. The COSMIN methodological quality was rated good for most measures, and the GRADE quality of evidence ranged from low (13%) to high (33%). The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and Neurogenic Bladder Symptom Score were of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence qualities.

Conclusion: Overactive Bladder Symptom Score, the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire and the Neurogenic Bladder Symptoms Score are promising psychometrically sound measures. The Overactive Bladder Symptom Score has been applied to the most culturally diverse populations supported by studies of good methodological and high-GRADE evidence quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Physiotherapy-led care versus physician-led care for persons with low back pain: A systematic review. Effects of osteopathic manipulative treatment associated with transcranial direct current stimulation in individuals with chronic low back pain: A double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training with physical therapy for low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prognostic factors of pain, disability, and poor outcomes in persons with neck pain - an umbrella review. Working towards consensus on the assessment of mood after severe acquired brain injury: Focus groups with UK-based professionals.
×
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