Social connection is important for long-term care (LTC) residents\' quality of life and care. However, there is a lack of consensus on how to measure it and this limits ability to find what improves and impairs social connection in LTC homes. We therefore aimed to systematically review and evaluate the measurement properties of existing measures of social connection for LTC residents, to identify which, if any, measures can be recommended. We searched eight electronic databases from inception to April 2022 for studies which reported on psychometric properties of a measure of any aspect(s) of social connection (including social networks, interaction, engagement, support, isolation, connectedness, and loneliness) for LTC residents. We used COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines to evaluate the measurement properties reported for each identified measure and make recommendations. We identified 62 studies reporting on 38 measures; 21 measured quality of life, well-being or life satisfaction and included a social connection subscale or standalone items and 17 measures specifically targeted social connection. We found there was little high-quality evidence on psychometric properties such as sufficient content validity (n = 0), structural validity (n = 3), internal consistency (n = 3), reliability (n = 1), measurement error (n = 0), construct validity (n = 4), criterion validity (n = 0) and responsiveness (n = 0). No measures demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties on all these aspects, so none could be recommended for use. Thirty-four measures have the potential to be recommended but require further research to assess their quality and the remaining four are not recommended for use. Our review therefore found that no existing measures have sufficient evidence to be recommended for assessment of social connection in residents of LTC homes. Further validation and reliability studies of existing instruments or the development of new measures are needed to enable accurate measurement of social connection in LTC residents for future observational and interventional studies.
UNASSIGNED: Social connection is fundamental to person-centered care in long-term care homes.There is insufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of existing measures.No current measures can be recommended for use based on existing evidence.A reliable and valid measure of social connection is needed for future research.

Background: In 1990, the United States\' Institute of Medicine promoted the principles of outcomes monitoring in the alcohol and other drugs treatment field to improve the evidence synthesis and quality of research. While various national outcome measures have been developed and employed, no global consensus on standard measurement has been agreed for addiction. It is thus timely to build an international consensus. Convened by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), an international, multi-disciplinary working group reviewed the existing literature and reached consensus for a globally applicable minimum set of outcome measures for people who seek treatment for addiction. Methods: To this end, 26 addiction experts from 11 countries and 5 continents, including people with lived experience (n = 5; 19%), convened over 16 months (December 2018-March 2020) to develop recommendations for a minimum set of outcome measures. A structured, consensus-building, modified Delphi process was employed. Evidence-based proposals for the minimum set of measures were generated and discussed across eight videoconferences and in a subsequent structured online consultation. The resulting set was reviewed by 123 professionals and 34 people with lived experience internationally. Results: The final consensus-based recommendation includes alcohol, substance, and tobacco use disorders, as well as gambling and gaming disorders in people aged 12 years and older. Recommended outcome domains are frequency and quantity of addictive disorders, symptom burden, health-related quality of life, global functioning, psychosocial functioning, and overall physical and mental health and wellbeing. Standard case-mix (moderator) variables and measurement time points are also recommended. Conclusions: Use of consistent and meaningful outcome measurement facilitates carer-patient relations, shared decision-making, service improvement, benchmarking, and evidence synthesis for the evaluation of addiction treatment services and the dissemination of best practices. The consensus set of recommended outcomes is freely available for adoption in healthcare settings globally.

OBJECTIVE: A core outcome set (COS) is an agreed standardized set of outcomes that should be measured and reported, as a minimum, in specific areas of health or health care. A COS is developed through a consensus process to ensure health care outcomes to be measured are relevant to decision-makers, including patients and health-care professionals. Use of COS in guideline development is likely to increase the relevance of the guideline to those decision-makers. Previous work has looked at the uptake of COS in trials, systematic reviews, health technology assessments and regulatory guidance but to date there has been no evaluation of the use of COS in practice guideline development. The objective of this study was to investigate the representation of core outcomes in a set of international practice guidelines.
METHODS: We searched for clinical guidelines relevant to ten high-quality COS (with focus on the United Kingdom, Germany, China, India, Canada, Denmark, United States and World Health Organisation). We matched scope between COS and guideline in terms of condition, population and outcome. We calculated the proportion of guidelines mentioning or referencing COS and the proportion of COS domains specifically, or generally, matching to outcomes specified in each guideline populations, interventions, comparators and outcome (PICO) statement.
RESULTS: We found 38 guidelines that contained 170 PICO statements matching the scope of the ten COS and of sufficient quality to allow data extraction. None of the guidelines reviewed explicitly mentioned or referenced the relevant COS. The median (range) of the proportion of core outcomes covered either specifically or generally by the guideline PICO was 30% (0%-100%).
CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that COS are being used routinely to inform the guideline development process, and concordance between outcomes in published guidelines and those in COS is limited. Further work is warranted to explore barriers and facilitators in the use of COS when developing clinical guidelines.

Measuring and benchmarking quality of care in surgical oncology has been gaining popularity. In autologous breast reconstruction (ABR), a standardized set of indicators to assess quality of care is lacking. In this study, we defined a set of evidence-based quality indicators for autologous breast reconstruction. First, we performed a systematic review to identify factors related to quality of care in ABR. Variables were categorized depending on their function: indicators related to outcome, indicators related to process and case-mix variables. The review was followed by a 3-round Delphi Consensus to determine which indicators and case-mix-variables were considered relevant and feasible for inclusion in an ABR standard set of indicators. 932 unique articles were identified, of which 110 papers were included in the study. Indicators were categorized by function: outcome, process and case-mix variables. In total, 8 process indicators and 41 outcome indicators were extracted. 30 case-mix-variables were included. Following 3 rounds of questioning in the Delphi Consensus, all respondents agreed on type of ABR, oncological outcomes and patient satisfaction for the standard set. Indicators related to complications were consistently ranked highly. Most process indicators were not chosen after 3 rounds of questioning. 11 case-mix-variables were included in the final set. Following the Delphi Consensus, it was possible to identify 33 process and outcome indicators and 11 case-mix-variables for inclusion for a standard set of quality indicators. With the inclusion of both objective and patient-reported outcome measures, this set of indicators provides a multidimensional measurement tool for quality assessment for ABR.

Heart failure is a growing epidemic with high mortality rates and recurrent hospital admissions that creates a burden on affected individuals, their caregivers and the whole healthcare system. Throughout the years, many randomized trials have established the effectiveness of several pharmacological therapies and electrophysiological devices to reduce hospitalizations and improve quality of life and survival, mostly for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). These studies led to the publication of national societies\' recommendations to guide clinicians in the management of HFrEF. Yet, many reports have shown significant care gaps in adherence to these recommendations in clinical practice, highlighting suboptimal use and/or dosing of evidence-based therapies. Adherence to guidelines has been shown to be associated with the best prognosis in HFrEF, with patients presenting with intolerances or contraindications having the highest risk of events; however, it remains unclear whether this association is causal or merely a marker of more advanced disease. Furthermore, individual characteristics may limit the possibility of reaching the targeted dosage of specific agents. Herein, we provide a comprehensive overview of clinicians\' adherence to heart failure guidelines in a specialized real-life setting, particularly regarding use and optimization of guideline-derived medical therapies, as well as the implementation of more recent agents such as sacubitril/valsartan and SGLT2 inhibitors. We seek potential explanations for suboptimal treatment and its impact on patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the discriminative and convergent validity of visual scales for the assessment of movement quality in the single-leg squat.
METHODS: Searches performed in CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Web of Science databases. Studies evaluating discriminative and convergent validity of movement quality visual assessments in single-leg squats were included. The COSMIN risk of bias checklist was used to assess the risk of bias, and certainty of evidence was assessed by the GRADE modified version.
RESULTS: Ten studies evaluating three different methods of visual assessment of the single-leg squat (Crossley scale; Whatman score and Medial knee displacement) were included. Very low certainty evidence suggests that the Crossley scale had sufficient discriminative validity for patient-centred outcomes. Very low to moderate certainty evidence suggests that the three visual methods of assessment of the single-leg squat had insufficient discriminative validity for surrogate outcomes and groups. None of the three methods had the convergent validity assessed.
CONCLUSIONS: The Crossley scale exhibited sufficient discriminative validity for patient-centred outcomes, although the evidence supporting this conclusion is of very low certainty. Visual scales for the assessment of the single-leg squat movement quality should be used with caution in clinical practice as most methods had insufficient discriminative validity and no reports of convergent validity.

Multi-arm, multi-stage (MAMS) platform trials can accelerate the identification of disease-modifying treatments for Parkinson\'s disease (PD) but there is no current consensus on the optimal outcome measures (OM) for this approach.
To provide an up-to-date inventory of OM for disease-modifying PD trials, and a framework for future selection of OM for such trials.
As part of the Edmond J Safra Accelerating Clinical Trials in Parkinson Disease (EJS ACT-PD) initiative, an expert group with Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) representatives\' input reviewed and evaluated available evidence on OM for potential use in trials to delay progression of PD. Each OM was ranked based on aspects such as validity, sensitivity to change, participant burden and practicality for a multi-site trial. Review of evidence and expert opinion led to the present inventory.
An extensive inventory of OM was created, divided into: general, motor and non-motor scales, diaries and fluctuation questionnaires, cognitive, disability and health-related quality of life, capability, quantitative motor, wearable and digital, combined, resource use, imaging and wet biomarkers, and milestone-based. A framework for evaluation of OM is presented to update the inventory in the future. PPIE input highlighted the need for OM which reflect their experience of disease progression and are applicable to diverse populations and disease stages.
We present a range of OM, classified according to a transparent framework, to aid selection of OM for disease-modifying PD trials, whilst allowing for inclusion or re-classification of relevant OM as new evidence emerges.

暂无摘要。

Idiopathic toe walking (ITW) is an exclusionary diagnosis given when children toe walk without a medical reason. Treatment effectiveness studies rarely collect data other than ankle range of motion or presence of toe walking.
To develop a set of outcome measures identified by health professionals for use when providing treatment with children who have ITW, to understand if parents agreed with this set, and if parents believed they could perform these measures in clinician absence.
Study 1 developed consensus and agreement on outcome measures for children receiving treatment for ITW through the modified Delphi technique with 10 expert health professionals. Parents of children who toe walked were invited to participate in an online survey for the second study, in which they were asked to rate the importance of these measures and if they believed they may be able to collect the data about their child without the health professional being present.
Ten health professionals developed nine questions and assessments through consensus and agreement over the three rounds. There were 34 parents providing information about satisfaction with toe walking assessments and treatments. Of these, 27 provide detailed responses about the outcome questions and assessments. The majority (91 % of 24 parents) in support of the outcome measures identified by experts. Parents expressed a willingness to self-complete questions or be taught assessments to monitor their child\'s progress.
Use of these clinically based measures may enable consistent data collection regardless of the setting and provide the foundation for large data pooling in future treatment research.

To systematically review measurement properties, including acceptability, feasibility, and interpretability, and current uses of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS).
Systematic review of a patient-reported outcome measure using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guidelines.
We searched 11 databases from January 2010 to July 2020 for articles on measurement properties or use of PSFS.
Published primary articles without language restrictions.
Two independent reviewers screened all records, extracted data, and performed risk of bias assessments using COSMIN guidelines. We qualitatively synthesized findings for each measurement property in musculoskeletal and nonmusculoskeletal conditions, and 2 reviewers independently performed Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessments. This study was preregistered with the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/42UZT).
Of the 985 articles screened, we included 57 articles on measurement properties and 255 articles on the use of PSFS. The PSFS had sufficient test-retest reliability in musculoskeletal (22 studies, 845 participants, low-to-moderate certainty) and nonmusculoskeletal conditions (6 studies, 197 participants, very low certainty), insufficient construct validity as a measure of physical function (21 studies, 2 945 participants, low-to-moderate certainty), and sufficient responsiveness (32 studies, 13 770 participants, moderate-to-high certainty). The standard error of measurement ranged from 0.35 to 1.5. The PSFS was used in 87 unique health conditions, some without prior evidence of validity.
The PSFS is an easy-to-use, reliable, and responsive scale in numerous musculoskeletal conditions, but the construct validity of PSFS remains uncertain. Further study of the measurement properties of the PSFS in nonmusculoskeletal conditions is necessary before clinical use. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(5):262-275. Epub: 05 Feb 2022. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10727.