Dataset Information

Variability in the validity and reliability of outcome measures identified in a systematic review to assess treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's Dementia.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Selection of optimal outcome measures is a critical step in a systematic review; inclusion of uncommon or non-validated outcome measures can impact the uptake of systematic review findings. Our goals were to identify the validity and reliability of outcome measures used in primary studies to assess cognition, function, behaviour and global status; and, to use these data to select outcomes for a systematic review (SR) on treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's Dementia (AD).

Methods

Articles fulfilling the eligibility criteria of the SR were included in a charting exercise to catalogue outcome measures reported. Outcome measures were then assessed for validity and reliability. Two independent reviewers abstracted data on outcome measures and validity and reliability reported for cognition, function, behaviour and global status.

Results

129 studies were included in the charting exercise; 57 outcome measures were identified for cognition, 21 for function, 13 for behaviour and 10 for global status. A total of 35 (61%) cognition measures, 10 (48%) functional measures, 8 (61%) behavioural measures and four (40%) of global status measures were only used once in the literature. Validity and reliability information was found for 51% of cognition measures, 90% of function and global status measures and 100% of behavioural measures.

Conclusions

While a large number of outcome measures were used in primary studies, many of these were used only once. Reporting of validity and reliability varied in AD studies of cognitive enhancers. Core outcome sets should be used when available; when they are not available researchers need to balance frequency of reported outcome measures, their respective validity and reliability, and preferences of knowledge users.

Systematic review registration

CRD#42012001948.

SUBMITTER: Soobiah C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6472754 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Variability in the validity and reliability of outcome measures identified in a systematic review to assess treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's Dementia.

Soobiah Charlene C Tadrous Mina M Knowles Sandra S Blondal Erik E Ashoor Huda M HM Ghassemi Marco M Khan Paul A PA Ho Joanne J Tricco Andrea C AC Straus Sharon E SE

PloS one 20190418 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Selection of optimal outcome measures is a critical step in a systematic review; inclusion of uncommon or non-validated outcome measures can impact the uptake of systematic review findings. Our goals were to identify the validity and reliability of outcome measures used in primary studies to assess cognition, function, behaviour and global status; and, to use these data to select outcomes for a systematic review (SR) on treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer ...[more]

PMID: 30998774

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundValid and reliable outcome measure enable measurement of health care service impact. There are limited valid and reliable outcome measures for use in podiatry practice to measure the impact of treatment. This research aimed to test the face validity of the AusTOMs for Physiotherapy (AusTOMs-PT), it's adaptability to podiatry clinical practice and the reliability of its use with podiatrists.MethodsStage 1 used a nominal group technique with podiatrists who worked in public and/or private settings. All podiatrists underwent self-directed training in the AusTOMs framework and measures prior to interviews or focus group discussion. Discussion was centred about transferability of the core scales of the AusTOMs-PT and an adjunct measure, AusTOMs for Occupational Therapy (AusTOMs-OT) to podiatry practice. Stage 2 used 10 case studies representative of people who had foot or ankle concerns. Podiatrists were recruited and trained in the use of the relevant AusTOMs-PT scales. Podiatrists individually scored the cases at two timepoints (1 month apart) using the six scales from the AusTOMs-PT deemed by stage 1 as relevant to podiatry. Intra and inter-rater reliability of scales were determined using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).ResultsThirteen podiatrists participated in individual or focus group interviews in Stage 1. Consensus was gained on six of the nine core scales adopted from the AusTOMs-PT. These were 1. Balance and Postural Control, 3. Musculoskeletal Movement Related Functions, 4. Neurological Movement Related Functions, 5. Pain, 7. Sensory Functions, 8. Skin Functions. Each core scale rated the functional domains of Impairment, Activity Limitation, Participation Restriction and Wellbeing/Distress relating to that presentation of goals of the person in the case study. There were 22 podiatrists complete training and scored two rounds of case studies using the six scales in Stage 2. There were 91%(n = 20) participants with an intra-rater ICC > 0.5 (moderate or greater). Each domain had an inter-rater reliability of > 0.9 (excellent) during the first round.ConclusionsThe AusTOMs-PT for use in podiatry may be implemented to record change in impairment, function, participation and wellbeing of people receiving podiatry treatment. Podiatry specific training and mentoring, together with repeated use could be expected to improve intra-reliability.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Recent animal studies have shown that noise exposure can cause cochlear synaptopathy without permanent threshold shift. Because the noise exposure preferentially damaged auditory nerve fibers that processed suprathreshold sounds (low-spontaneous rate fibers), it has been suggested that synaptopathy may underlie suprathreshold hearing deficits in humans. Recently, several researchers have suggested measures to identify the pathology or pathologies underlying suprathreshold hearing deficits in humans based on results from animal studies; however, the reliability of some of these measures have not been assessed. The purpose of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability of measures that may have the potential to relate suprathreshold hearing deficits to site(s)-of-lesion along the peripheral auditory system in humans. DESIGN:Adults with audiometric normal hearing were tested on a battery of behavioral and physiologic measures that included (1) thresholds in quiet (TIQ), (2) thresholds in noise (TIN), (3) frequency-modulation detection threshold (FMDT), (4) word recognition in four listening conditions, (5) distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE), (6) middle ear muscle reflex (MEMR), (7) tone burst-elicited auditory brainstem response (tbABR), and (8) speech-evoked ABR (sABR). Data collection for each measure was repeated over two visits separated by at least one week. The residuals of the correlation between the suprathreshold measures and TIQ serve as functional and quantitative proxies for threshold-independent hearing disorders because they represent the portion of the raw measures that is not dependent on TIQ. Reliability of the residual measures was assessed using intraclass correlation (ICC). RESULTS:Reliability for the residual measures was good (ICC ≥ 0.75) for FMDT, DPOAEs, and MEMR. Residual measures showing moderate reliability (0.5 ≤ ICC < 0.75) were tbABR wave I amplitude, TIN, and word recognition in quiet, noise, and time-compressed speech with reverberation. Wave V of the tbABR, waves of the sABR, and recognition of time-compressed words had poor test-retest reliability (ICC < 0.5). CONCLUSIONS:Reliability of residual measures was mixed, suggesting that care should be taken when selecting measures for diagnostic tests of threshold-independent hearing disorders. Quantifying hidden hearing loss as the variance in suprathreshold measures of auditory function that is not due to TIQ may provide a reliable estimate of threshold-independent hearing disorders in humans.

Dataset Information

Variability in the validity and reliability of outcome measures identified in a systematic review to assess treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's Dementia.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Systematic review registration

Publications

Variability in the validity and reliability of outcome measures identified in a systematic review to assess treatment efficacy of cognitive enhancers for Alzheimer's Dementia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets