Rehabilitation Sciences Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Sep;99(9):1848-1875. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2018.02.004. Epub 2018 Mar 7.
To critically appraise the measurement property evidence (ie, psychometric) for 8 observation-based financial management assessment instruments.
Seven databases were searched in May 2015.
Two reviewers used an independent decision-agreement process to select studies of measurement property evidence relevant to populations with adulthood acquired cognitive impairment, appraise the quality of the evidence, and extract data. Twenty-one articles were selected.
This review used the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments review guidelines and 4-point tool to appraise evidence. After appraising the methodologic quality, the adequacy of results and volume of evidence per instrument were synthesized. Measurement property evidence with high risk of bias was excluded from the synthesis.
The volume of measurement property evidence per instrument is low; most instruments had 1 to 3 included studies. Many included studies had poor methodologic quality per measurement property evidence area examined. Six of the 8 instruments reviewed had supporting construct validity/hypothesis-testing evidence of fair methodologic quality. There is a dearth of acceptable quality content validity, reliability, and responsiveness evidence for all 8 instruments.
Rehabilitation practitioners assess financial management functions in adults with acquired cognitive impairments. However, there is limited published evidence to support using any of the reviewed instruments. Practitioners should exercise caution when interpreting the results of these instruments. This review highlights the importance of appraising the quality of measurement property evidence before examining the adequacy of the results and synthesizing the evidence.
批判性评价 8 种基于观察的财务管理评估工具的测量属性证据（即心理测量学）。
2015 年 5 月，7 个数据库被检索。
两名审查员使用独立的决策协议过程，选择与成年后天认知障碍人群相关的测量属性证据研究，评价证据质量，并提取数据。选择了 21 篇文章。
本综述使用共识基础的健康测量仪器选择标准和 4 点工具来评价证据。在评价方法学质量后，按仪器进行结果充分性和证据量的综合。具有高偏倚风险的测量属性证据被排除在综合之外。
每个仪器的测量属性证据量都很低；大多数仪器只有 1 到 3 项纳入研究。每个仪器所纳入的研究，在测量属性证据检查的各个方面，均具有较差的方法学质量。所审查的 8 种仪器中的 6 种具有支持构建有效性/假设检验的合理方法学质量的证据。所有 8 种仪器都缺乏可接受质量的内容有效性、可靠性和反应性证据。
康复从业者评估后天认知障碍成年人的财务管理功能。然而，支持使用任何已审查工具的可用证据有限。从业者在解释这些工具的结果时应谨慎。本综述强调在检查结果充分性和综合证据之前，评估测量属性证据质量的重要性。
