Cargando…

A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation

Choosing the most adequate PROM for a study is a non‐trivial process. The aim of this study was to provide a catalogue with analyses of content and construct validity of PROMs relevant to research in sports science, including all published local translations. The most commonly used PROMs in sports r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hansen, Christian F., Jensen, Jonas, Siersma, Volkert, Brodersen, John, Comins, Jonathan D., Krogsgaard, Michael R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33464661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.13923
_version_ 1783717194913284096
author Hansen, Christian F.
Jensen, Jonas
Siersma, Volkert
Brodersen, John
Comins, Jonathan D.
Krogsgaard, Michael R.
author_facet Hansen, Christian F.
Jensen, Jonas
Siersma, Volkert
Brodersen, John
Comins, Jonathan D.
Krogsgaard, Michael R.
author_sort Hansen, Christian F.
collection PubMed
description Choosing the most adequate PROM for a study is a non‐trivial process. The aim of this study was to provide a catalogue with analyses of content and construct validity of PROMs relevant to research in sports science, including all published local translations. The most commonly used PROMs in sports research were selected from a PubMed search “patient reported outcome measures sports”, identifying 439 articles and 194 different PROMs. Articles describing development of the 61 selected PROMs were assessed for content validity, and all articles regarding construct validity of each PROM and all published translations (in total 622 articles) were analyzed. A catalogue with assessments of the 61 PROMs was produced. The majority were of inferior validity, with few exceptions. The most common reason for this was that the PROM had not been developed by methods that ensure high content validity. Another major reason for inferior validity was that construct validity had not been secured by adequate statistical methods. In conclusion, this catalogue provides a tool for researchers to facilitate choosing the most valid PROM for studies in sports research. Furthermore, it shows for popular PROMs where further validation is needed, and for fields in musculoskeletal medicine where valid PROMs are lacking. It is suggested that a targeted effort is made to develop valid PROMs for major conditions in musculoskeletal research. The current method is easier to practice compared with assessment after COSMIN guidelines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8251933
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82519332021-07-07 A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation Hansen, Christian F. Jensen, Jonas Siersma, Volkert Brodersen, John Comins, Jonathan D. Krogsgaard, Michael R. Scand J Med Sci Sports Original Articles Choosing the most adequate PROM for a study is a non‐trivial process. The aim of this study was to provide a catalogue with analyses of content and construct validity of PROMs relevant to research in sports science, including all published local translations. The most commonly used PROMs in sports research were selected from a PubMed search “patient reported outcome measures sports”, identifying 439 articles and 194 different PROMs. Articles describing development of the 61 selected PROMs were assessed for content validity, and all articles regarding construct validity of each PROM and all published translations (in total 622 articles) were analyzed. A catalogue with assessments of the 61 PROMs was produced. The majority were of inferior validity, with few exceptions. The most common reason for this was that the PROM had not been developed by methods that ensure high content validity. Another major reason for inferior validity was that construct validity had not been secured by adequate statistical methods. In conclusion, this catalogue provides a tool for researchers to facilitate choosing the most valid PROM for studies in sports research. Furthermore, it shows for popular PROMs where further validation is needed, and for fields in musculoskeletal medicine where valid PROMs are lacking. It is suggested that a targeted effort is made to develop valid PROMs for major conditions in musculoskeletal research. The current method is easier to practice compared with assessment after COSMIN guidelines. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-04 2021-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8251933/ /pubmed/33464661 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.13923 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science In Sports published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Hansen, Christian F.
Jensen, Jonas
Siersma, Volkert
Brodersen, John
Comins, Jonathan D.
Krogsgaard, Michael R.
A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title_full A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title_fullStr A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title_full_unstemmed A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title_short A catalogue of PROMs in sports science: Quality assessment of PROM development and validation
title_sort catalogue of proms in sports science: quality assessment of prom development and validation
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8251933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33464661
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.13923
work_keys_str_mv AT hansenchristianf acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT jensenjonas acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT siersmavolkert acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT brodersenjohn acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT cominsjonathand acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT krogsgaardmichaelr acatalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT hansenchristianf catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT jensenjonas catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT siersmavolkert catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT brodersenjohn catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT cominsjonathand catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation
AT krogsgaardmichaelr catalogueofpromsinsportssciencequalityassessmentofpromdevelopmentandvalidation