COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study
出版年份 2018 全文链接
标题
COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study
作者
关键词
Patient outcome assessment, Validation studies, Content validity, Patient-reported outcome, COSMIN, Systematic review
出版物
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 1159-1170
出版商
Springer Nature
发表日期
2018-03-17
DOI
10.1007/s11136-018-1829-0
参考文献
相关参考文献
注意:仅列出部分参考文献,下载原文获取全部文献信息。- A systematic review highlights the need to investigate the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures for physical functioning in patients with low back pain
- (2018) Alessandro Chiarotto et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline
- (2016) Cecilia A. C. Prinsen et al. Trials
- ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research
- (2013) Bryce B. Reeve et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
- (2011) Gordon Guyatt et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: perspectives from a PROMIS meeting
- (2011) Susan Magasi et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist
- (2011) Caroline B. Terwee et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Content Validity—Establishing and Reporting the Evidence in Newly Developed Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments for Medical Product Evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: Part 2—Assessing Respondent Understanding
- (2011) Donald L. Patrick et al. VALUE IN HEALTH
- Content Validity—Establishing and Reporting the Evidence in Newly Developed Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Instruments for Medical Product Evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force Report: Part 1—Eliciting Concepts for a New PRO Instrument
- (2011) Donald L. Patrick et al. VALUE IN HEALTH
- The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content
- (2010) Lidwine B Mokkink et al. BMC Medical Research Methodology
- The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes
- (2010) Lidwine B. Mokkink et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study
- (2010) Lidwine B. Mokkink et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience
- (2009) Meryl Brod et al. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
- Use of Existing Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Instruments and Their Modification: The ISPOR Good Research Practices for Evaluating and Documenting Content Validity for the Use of Existing Instruments and Their Modification PRO Task Force Report
- (2009) Margaret Rothman et al. VALUE IN HEALTH
- Perspectives on Patient-Reported Outcomes
- (2008) Nancy Kline Leidy et al. PHARMACOECONOMICS
- On the Use, the Misuse, and the Very Limited Usefulness of Cronbach’s Alpha
- (2008) Klaas Sijtsma PSYCHOMETRIKA
- Development of EMPRO: A Tool for the Standardized Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
- (2008) Jose M. Valderas et al. VALUE IN HEALTH
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
- (2008) Gordon H Guyatt et al. BMJ-British Medical Journal
Find the ideal target journal for your manuscript
Explore over 38,000 international journals covering a vast array of academic fields.
SearchAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started