Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Aug 13;23(8):e25002.
doi: 10.2196/25002.

Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review

Priscilla Jia Ling Wee #  1 , Yu Heng Kwan #  2   3 , Dionne Hui Fang Loh  4 , Jie Kie Phang  5 , Troy H Puar  6 , Truls Østbye  2 , Julian Thumboo  2   5   7 , Sungwon Yoon  2 , Lian Leng Low  4   8   9
Affiliations

Measurement Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Diabetes: Systematic Review

Priscilla Jia Ling Wee et al. J Med Internet Res. .

Abstract

Background: The management of diabetes is complex. There is growing recognition of the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as a standardized method of obtaining an outlook on patients' functional status and well-being. However, no systematic reviews have summarized the studies that investigate the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs.

Objective: Our aims were to conduct a systematic review of studies investigating the measurement properties of diabetes PROMs by evaluating the methodological quality and overall level of evidence of these PROMs and to categorize them based on the outcome measures assessed.

Methods: This study was guided by the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. Relevant articles were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases. The PROMs were evaluated with the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) guidelines.

Results: A total of 363 articles evaluating the measurement properties of PROMs for diabetes in the adult population were identified, of which 238 unique PROMs from 248 studies reported in 209 articles were validated in the type 2 diabetes population. PROMs with at least a moderate level of evidence for ≥5 of 9 measurement properties include the Chinese version of the Personal Diabetes Questionnaire (C-PDQ), Diabetes Self-Management Instrument Short Form (DSMI-20), and Insulin Treatment Appraisal Scale in Hong Kong primary care patients (C-ITAS-HK), of which the C-PDQ has a "sufficient (+)" rating for >4 measurement properties. A total of 43 PROMs meet the COSMIN guidelines for recommendation for use.

Conclusions: This study identified and synthesized evidence for the measurement properties of 238 unique PROMs for patients with type 2 diabetes and categorized the PROMs according to their outcome measures. These findings may assist clinicians and researchers in selecting appropriate high-quality PROMs for clinical practice and research.

Trial registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020180978; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020180978.

Keywords: PROMs; diabetes; level of evidence; measurement properties; methodological quality; patient reported outcome; patient-reported outcome measures; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of the systematic literature review. DM: diabetes mellitus; PROM: patient-reported outcome measure.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. IDF Diabetes Atlas, 9th edition. International Diabetes Federation. 2019. [2020-08-01]. https://www.diabetesatlas.org.
    1. American Diabetes Association 1. Promoting health and reducing disparities in populations. Diabetes Care. 2016 Dec 15;40(Supplement 1):S6–S10. doi: 10.2337/dc17-s004. http://care.diabetesjournals.org/lookup/doi/10.2337/dc17-S004 - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Skovlund SE, Lichtenberg T, Hessler D, Ejskjaer N. Can the routine use of patient-reported outcome measures improve the delivery of person-centered diabetes care? A review of recent developments and a case study. Curr Diab Rep. 2019 Aug 16;19(9):1–18. doi: 10.1007/s11892-019-1190-x. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11892-019-1190-x - DOI - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weldring T, Smith SM. Article Commentary: Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Health Serv Ins. 2013 Aug 04;6:HSI.S11093–68. doi: 10.4137/hsi.s11093. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.4137/HSI.S11093 - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boyer JG, Earp JAL. The development of an instrument for assessing the quality of life of people with diabetes. Med Care. 1997 May;35(5):440–453. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199705000-00003. http://journals.lww.com/00005650-199705000-00003 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types