The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study

By L. Mokkink, C. Terwee, D.walaa badawy, Jordi Alonso, P. Stratford, Dirk L. Knol, Lex M. Bouter, HC de Vet. Quality of Life Research, 2010

3,767 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BackgroundAim of the COSMIN study (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) was to develop a consensus-based checklist to evaluate the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties. We present the COSMIN checklist and the agreement of the panel on the items of the checklist.MethodsA four-round Delphi study was performed with international experts (psychologists, epidemiologists, statisticians and clinicians). Of the 91 invited experts, 57 agreed to participate (63%). Panel members were asked to rate their (dis)agreement with each proposal on a five-point scale. Consensus was considered to be reached when at least 67% of the panel members indicated ‘agree’ or ‘strongly agree’.ResultsConsensus was reached on the inclusion of the following measurement properties: internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity (including face validity), construct validity (including structural validity, hypotheses testing and cross-cultural validity), criterion validity, responsiveness, and interpretability. The latter was not considered a measurement property. The panel also reached consensus on how these properties should be assessed.ConclusionsThe resulting COSMIN checklist could be useful when selecting a measurement instrument, peer-reviewing a manuscript, designing or reporting a study on measurement properties, or for educational purposes.

Subfields: Education, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1d001fad324cadb878ac15175b0bdd7a47a7b70b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (2018, background): “, evaluating the distribution of scores in the study population, percentage of missing items, floor and ceiling effects, the availability of scores and change scores for relevant (sub) groups, and the minimal important change (MIC) or minimal important difference [26]).”
Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider (2012, methodology): “nl) checklist [27] can be used as a tool for developing studies of the validity and reliability of measurement instruments because it describes the necessary design requirements for the assessment of those measurement properties.”
Measuring financial toxicity as a clinically relevant patient‐reported outcome: The validation of the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST) (2016, neutral): “22 Median Brief-POMS (range) 14 (1-50) <.”
Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT filter 2.0. (2014, methodology): “Drawing on key developments that have occurred after the formulation of the first Filter such as the work by the COSMIN group [31,32], and the GRADE recommendations [30], OMERACT is developing specific guidelines on the procedures to document applicability of instruments.”
Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures (2014, neutral): “[11], but did not define its meaning or interpretation, and the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust noted that developers should include methods of sample size determination [9].”
The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. (2010, result): “We chose to focus on HR-PROs because of the complexity of these instruments.”
Accuracy of Fitbit Devices: Systematic Review and Narrative Syntheses of Quantitative Data (2018, methodology): “All articles were independently assessed for risk of bias by 2 independent reviewers (JG, CP) using a modification of the validation subscale from the checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments (Consensus-Based Sta”
What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences (2018, methodology): “The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group have developed guidance for conducting these types of reviews [19, 31].”
The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content (2010, methodology): “In an international Delphi study we developed the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties [2,3].”
How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline (2016, positive): “Experts who were identified from the literature review, as well as experts who participated in a previous COS-MIN Delphi study [13], were invited to participate.”
COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study (2018, methodology): “The two newly developed COSMIN boxes replace box D (content validity) of the original COSMIN checklist [20].”
Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist (2011, methodology): “However, as we stated in the articles on the development of the COSMIN checklist [7, 8], what is adequate may depend on a number of issues.”
The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017, background): “COSMIN has also developed a checklist about which measurement properties are important and standards for how to evaluate their measurement properties [43].”