Review of Health Outcome Measures in Osteoarthritis
Author Information
Author(s): Beth Pollard, Marie Johnston, Diane Dixon
Primary Institution: University of Aberdeen
Hypothesis
Evaluating the theoretical framework and methodological development of subjective health outcome measures in osteoarthritis research.
Conclusion
The review highlights a general lack of theoretical framework and methodological rigor in commonly used health outcome measures for osteoarthritis.
Supporting Evidence
- Only three measures defined the construct of interest, and none were based on a theoretical model.
- Clinician report measures generally lacked a defined scaling strategy.
- Patient self-report measures showed better methodological development compared to clinician report measures.
Takeaway
This study looked at how well different health measures for arthritis are made. It found that many don't clearly explain what they are measuring or how they work.
Methodology
The review examined 14 subjective health outcome measures used in osteoarthritis research, focusing on their theoretical frameworks and methodological development.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the reliance on published literature, which may not include all relevant studies.
Limitations
The review may not cover newer measures and is limited to those frequently referenced in the literature.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website