HomeArticles2022 No.1Details

The framework of user’s manuals for assessment scales in the medical fields: a qualita-tive systematic review

Update:Feb. 25, 2022Total Views:1063Total Downloads:1201 DownloadMobile

Author: Sha DIAO 1, 2, 3 Meng-Ting YANG 1, 2, 3, 4 Li-Nan ZENG 1, 2, 3 Qiu-Sha YI 1, 2, 3 Zhen-Yan BO 1, 2, 3, Hai-Long LI, 1, 2, 3 Qiang WANG 5 Ling-Li ZHANG 1, 2, 3

Affiliation: 1. Department of Pharmacy, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China 2. Evidence-Based Pharmacy Center, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China 3. Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children, Ministry of Education, Chengdu 610041, China 4. West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China 5. Medical Management Service Guidance Center, National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China, Beijing 100044, China

Keywords: Assessment scales User's manual Systematic review


Reference:Diao S, Yang MT, Zeng LN, Yi QS, Bo ZY, Li HL, Wang Q, Zhang LL. The framework of user's manuals for assessment scales in the medical fields: a qualitative systematic review[J]. Yixue Xinzhi Zazhi, 2022, 32(1): 10-22. DOI: 10.12173/j.issn.1004-5511.202111007.[Article in Chinese]

  • Abstract
  • Full-text
  • Figures and Tables
  • References

Objective  To perform a qualitative systematic review of the framework of user’s manuals for assessment scales in medical fields. 

Methods  The following databases, PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang and VIP, were searched from the establishment of the database to January 2021. The subject scope was limited to the field of biomedical health. The user’s manuals and also the literature that only mentioned the name of user’s manuals were included, so as to we could perform a supplemental search for the corresponding references and the official websites of the scale. Two researchers conducted the literature screening and data extraction independently. Then the sub-ject synthesis method was used to construct a framework for user’s manuals. 

Results  A total of 31 studies were included, involving 31 user’s manuals. The framework found in user’s manuals varied among different assessment scales. It was composed of 8 parts, which were prefaces, backgrounds, summaries, methods, item introductions, examples, attachments and references. Item introductions, accounting for 68%, form the most important part of the content. 

Conclusion  There is not yet any agreed format for the framework of user’s manuals, but each manual mainly focuses on the introduction of items, interpretation of results and conclusions, supplemented by the background of tool research and development, so the scales developer can formulate frameworks according to the characteristics of the target population, develop user's manuals with different levels of detail and different expression styles, in order to improve the efficiency of manual use. 

Please download the PDF version to read the full text: download

1.罗伯特·F·德威利斯. 量表编制: 理论与应用: 第2版[M]. 重庆:重庆大学出版社, 2004. [DeVellis, R. F. Scale De-velopment: Theory and Applications (2nd ed)[M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press, 2004.]

2.李莹. 用户手册翻译实践报告——以三份英文用户手册的汉译为例[D]. 上海:上海师范大学, 2017. [Li Y. An report on the Chinese translation of three user's manual in English[D]. Shanghai: Shanghai Normal University, 2017.]

3.Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews[J]. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2008, 8: 45. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-8-45.

4.张静怡, 张雅婷, 盖琼艳, 等. 定性资料的系统评价方法学汇总[J]. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2017, 9(5): 523-527. [Zhang JY, Zhang YT, Gai QY, et al. A summarization of systematic review methodology for qualitative data[J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Bases Cardiovascular Medicine, 2017, 9(5): 523-527.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-4055.2017.05.04.

5.Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller S. SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a user's manu-al[EB/OL]. (1994-12)[2021-10-19]. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John-Ware-6/publication/292390260_SF-36_Physical_and_Mental_Health_Summary_Scales_a_User%27s_Manual/links/5af580264585157136caee31/SF-36-Physical-and-Mental-Health-Summary-Scales-a-Users-Manual.pdf.

6.Ritvo PG, Fischer JS, Miller DM, et al. Multiple sclerosis quality of life inventory: a user's manual[EB/OL]. (1997)[2021-10-19]. http://walkcoc.nationalmssociety.org/docs/HOM/MSQLI_Manual_and_Forms.pdf.

7.郝元涛, 方积乾. 世界卫生组织生存质量测定量表中文版介绍及其使用说明[J]. 现代康复, 2000, 4(8): 1127-1129, 1145. [Hao YT, Fang JQ. The introduce and usage of WHOQOL instrument in Chinese[J]. Modern Reha-bilitation, 2000, 4(8): 1127-1129, 1145.] DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1673-8225.2000.08.002.

8.中国心理卫生协会. 心理评估质量控制规定及从业人员道德准则[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2001, 9(1): 79-80. [Chinese Mental Health Association. Psychological assessment quality control regulations and code of ethics for practitioners[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 2001, 9(1): 79-80.] https://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/perio dical/zglcxlxzz200101033.

9.周登远. 临床试验文献质量评价量表的制作及应用[D]. 天津: 天津医科大学, 2005. [Zhou DY. The development and application of the scale for assessing the report quality of clinical trials[D]. Tianjin: Tianjin Medical University.]

10.AWMF and AQuMed. The German Guideline Evaluation Instrument (DELBI)[EB/OL]. [2021-10-19]. https://www.leitlinien.de/hintergrund/pdf/german-guideline-appraisal-instrument-delbi.pdf.

11.刘为民, 何丽云, 王建, 等. 世界卫生组织艾滋病生存质量量表中文版介绍及其使用说明[J]. 中国中医药信息杂志, 2009, 16(10): 1-2, 52. [Liu WM, He LY, Wang J, et al. Introduction of the Chinese version of the World Health Organization AIDS Quality of Life Scale and its use[J]. Chinese Journal of Information on Tradi-tional Chinese Medicine, 2009, 16(10): 1-2, 52.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-5304.2009.10.001.

12.AGREE Research Trust. Appraisal of guidelines for research & evaluation II[EB/OL]. (2017-12) [2021-10-19]. https://www.agreetrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/AGREE-II-Users-Manual-and-23-item-Instrument-2009-Update-2017.pdf.

13.周红俊, 康海琼, 李建军,等. 应用专家咨询法制定四肢瘫日常生活能力评定量表[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2011, 17(6): 549-556. [Zhou HJ, Kang HQ, Li JJ, et al. Development of the scale for assessing the Chinese quadriplegia activities of daily living using delphi method[J]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice, 2011, 17(6): 549-556.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn. 1006-9771.2011.06.014.

14.张冠男. 《"三理"诊疗模式评估及指标手册》的编制及应用[D]. 郑州: 郑州大学, 2016. [Zhang GN. Establishment and application of "physiological - psychosocial - ethical treatment model assessment and Indicators manual"[D]. Zhengzhou: Zhengzhou University, 2016.]

15.Jonathan Sterne, Julian Higgins, Barney Reeves, et al. ROBINS-I tool[EB/OL]. (2016-08) [2021-11-19]. https://www.riskofbias.info/welcome/home/current-version-of-robins-i.

16.Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. The Privacy, Confidentiality and Security Assessment Tool: User Manual[EB/OL]. [2021-10-19]. https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2019/confidentiality_security_tool_user_manual.

17.Dichter MN, Schwab CG, Meyer G, et al. Item distribution, internal consistency and inter-rater reliabil-ity of the German version of the QUALIDEM for people with mild to severe and very severe demen-tia[J]. BMC Geriatr, 2016, 16: 126. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-016-0296-0.

18.Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that in-clude randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both[J]. BMJ, 2017, 358: j4008. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j4008.

19.Akl EA, Fadlallah R, Ghandour L, et al. The SPARK Tool to prioritise questions for systematic reviews in health policy and systems research: development and initial validation[J]. Health Res Policy Syst, 2017, 15(1): 77. DOI: 10.1186/s12961-017-0242-4.

20.程硕. 上海市《特殊儿童感知能力评估量表》的修订及简化版编制[D]. 上海: 华东师范大学, 2018. [Cheng S. Revision  of  Shanghai  special  child  perception  scale and compilation of simplified version[D]. Shanghai: East China Normal University, 2018.]

21.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washing-ton Pain Related Self-Efficacy Scale (PRSE)-Users Guide[EB/OL]. (2018-12-11) [2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/uw-prse-userguide.pdf.

22.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washing-ton Resilience Scale-Users Guide[EB/OL]. (2018-12-11)[2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/uw-resil-userguide.pdf.

23.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washing-ton Self-Efficacy Scale (UW-SES)-Users Guide[EB/OL]. (2018-12-07) [2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/uw-ses-userguide.pdf.

24.Hammond A, Tennant A, Tyson S, et al. Evaluation of daily activity questionnaire: User manual V3[EB/OL]. (2018)[2021-10-19]. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/30752/8/EDAQ%20Manual%20v3%20A%20Hammond%2016.3.18%20v2.pdf.

25.GA Wells, B Shea, D O'Connell, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses[EB/OL]. [2021-10-19]. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiolo gy/nos_manual.pdf.

26.高海亮, 卢颖, 姜婷婷, 等. 药物经济学评价报告质量评估指南[J]. 中国药物经济学, 2019, 14(2): 18-28. [Gao HL, Lu Y, Jiang TT, et al. Guidelines for quality assessment of pharmacoeconomic evaluation report[J]. China Journal of Pharmaceutical Economics, 2019, 14(2): 18-28.] https://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/periodical/ChlQZXJpb2RpY2FsQ0hJTmV3UzIwMjExMjMwEhB6Z3l3amp4MjAxOTAyMDA0Ggg2MmljZm92Zg%3D%3D.

27.Higgins JP, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) [EB/OL]. (2019-08-22) [2021-10-19]. https://www.riskofbias.info/welcome/rob-2-0-tool/current-version-of-rob-2.

28.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washing-ton Concerns About Pain (UW-CAP) Users Guide [EB/OL]. (2019-04-30) [2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/uw-cap-userguide.pdf.

29.Mokkink LB, Boers M, van der Vleuten CPM, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instrument: User Manual[EB/OL]. (2019-04-30) [2021-10-19]. https://www.cosmin.nl/wp-content/uploads/user-manual-COSMIN-Risk-of-Bias-tool_v4_JAN_final.pdf.

30.Piot I, Schweyer K, Respondek G, et al. The progressive supranuclear palsy clinical deficits scale[J]. Mov Disord, 2020, 35(4): 650-661. DOI: 10.1002/mds.27964.

31.Mutai R, Sugiyama Y, Yoshida S, et al. Development and validation of a Japanese version of the Pa-tient Centred Assessment Method and its user guide: a cross-sectional study[J]. BMJ Open, 2020, 10(11): e037282. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037282.

32.Hansen MS, Nilsson Helander K, Karlsson J, et al. A manual to ATRS (Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score) [EB/OL]. (2019) [2021-10-19]. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0363546520912222/suppl_file/DS_10.1177_0363546520912222.pdf.

33.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washington Caregiver Stress Scale (UW-CSS): User Guide[EB/OL]. (2020-05-30) [2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/uw-css-user-guide-v2.pdf.

34.The University of Washington Center on Outcomes Research in Rehabilitation. University of Washing-ton Caregiver Benefit Scale (UW-CBS): User Guide[EB/OL]. (2020-05-29) [2021-10-19]. https://uwcorr.washington.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/uw-cbs-user-guide-v2.pdf.

35.Brouwers MC, Spithoff K, Kerkvliet K, et al. Development and validation of a tool to assess the quality of clinical practice guideline recommendations[J]. JAMA Netw Open, 2020, 3(5): e205535. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen. 2020.5535.

Hot Papers