• No se han encontrado resultados

5. Aspectos Metodológicos

5.2. Diseño experimental

Ratings

1 Yes

2 No

3 Not evaluated or not reported

NA Not applicable

Outcome Measure Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – Symptoms

subscale

Author’s Last Name Roos

Title of the Article Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score KOOS Development of a Self Administered Outcome Measure

Year 1998

PubMed ID: 9699158

Reviewer’s Name Travis Hamilton

Date of Review 7.13.11

Content Validity

Reported that items were generated by team of experts 1

Reported that items were developed from patient input 1

Reported that content was developed from statistical modeling NA

Evaluated floor and ceiling effect NA

If yes. <30% of sample scored at endpoint NA

Data normally distributed NA

Construct Validity

Correlated with a generic instrument/scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36; TABLE 3. - PF = .29 , RP = .27 , BP = .08 Correlated with theoretically similar scale NA

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient

Uncorrelated with theoretically distinct scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36; TABLE 3. - RE =-.17 , MH = .13 Tested specific hypothesis to demonstrate construct validity? NA

If yes. What is found? Criterion Validity

Correlated with “gold standard” NA

Predictive of a future outcome NA

If yes to either of above, report how this was demonstrated Internal Consistency

Evidence for acceptable internal consistency NA (eg.. Cronbach’s α > .60)

Test-Retest Reliability

Evidence for test-retest reliability (eg.. ICC>.70) 1

Indicate value: ICC: symptoms = .93

Testing interval (time between repeated measures) Within 9 days Interrater Reliability

Evidence for interrater reliability (eg..Kappa > .60) NA Indicate Value:

Responsiveness

Group level statistics reported (eg. Effect size. Standardized response mean. Guyatt’s responsiveness index. Regression model) 1

Report statistics: ES. SRM. Guyatt’s TABLE 5.

Individual level statistics reported (eg. Minimal detectable change.

Minimum clinically important change) NA

Report statistics:

Change in measure related to change in external standard NA Measure demonstrated change for patients who received known

efficacious treatment (indicate statistic) Table 4 Time interval between baseline and follow-up assessments 3 and 6 month Descriptive Features

Age range of sample 32 (18-46)

Number: 21 Sex Male 9 Female 12 Diagnosis ACL injury/surgery 1 PCL injury/surgery Other ligament injury/surgery + ACL Meniscus. Articuler artroscopy +ACL OA PF General knee pain Combined injury Sport related Cartilage degeneration or surgery

Provide normative data 2

Provide information about scoring and weighting of items: 1

Provided information about calculating with missing values: 1

Recall period (eg. “in the last month”) 1 week

Language(s) of instrument used in this report 1; English and Swedish Is this the first or primary report about this instrument? 1

KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE (KOOS) – Symptoms subscale

Ratings

1 Yes

2 No

3 Not evaluated or not reported

NA Not applicable

Outcome Measure Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – symptoms

subscale

Author’s Last Name Roos

Title of the Article Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score KOOS validation of a Swedish version

Year 1998

PubMed ID: 9863983

Reviewer’s Name Travis Hamilton

Date of Review 7.13.11

Content Validity

Reported that items were generated by team of experts NA Reported that items were developed from patient input NA Reported that content was developed from statistical modeling NA

Evaluated floor and ceiling effect 1

If yes. <30% of sample scored at endpoint 1 Table 2.

Data normally distributed NA

Construct Validity

Correlated with a generic instrument/scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36. Table 4 - PF = .32 , RP = .14 , BP = .29 Correlated with theoretically similar scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient Lysholm. Table 4 Uncorrelated with theoretically distinct scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36. Table 4 - RE =.0 , MH = .04 Tested specific hypothesis to demonstrate construct validity? NA

If yes. What is found? Criterion Validity

Correlated with “gold standard” NA

Predictive of a future outcome NA

If yes to either of above, report how this was demonstrated Internal Consistency

Evidence for acceptable internal consistency 1

(eg.. Cronbach’s α > .60)

Test-Retest Reliability

Evidence for test-retest reliability (eg.. ICC>.70) 1

Indicate value: ICC: Symptoms = .84

Testing interval (time between repeated measures) Within 8 days Interrater Reliability

Evidence for interrater reliability (eg..Kappa > .60) NA Indicate Value:

Responsiveness

Group level statistics reported (eg. Effect size. Standardized response mean. Guyatt’s responsiveness index. Regression model) 1

Report statistics: ES. SRM. Guyatt’s ES: Symptoms = .93 Individual level statistics reported (eg. Minimal detectable change.

Minimum clinically important change) na

Report statistics:

Change in measure related to change in external standard na Measure demonstrated change for patients who received known

efficacious treatment (indicate statistic)

Time interval between baseline and follow-up assessments 3 months Descriptive Features

Age range of sample

Number: 142

Sex Table 1.

Male Female

Diagnosis Figure 1 and 2

ACL injury/surgery PCL injury/surgery Other ligament injury/surgery + ACL Meniscus. Articuler artroscopy +ACL OA PF General knee pain Combined injury Sport related Cartilage degeneration or surgery Provide normative data

Provide information about scoring and weighting of items: 1 Provided information about calculating with missing values: 1

Recall period (eg. “in the last month”) Past week Language(s) of instrument used in this report Swedish Is this the first or primary report about this instrument? 2

Notes:

KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE (KOOS) – Symptoms subscale

Ratings

1 Yes

2 No

3 Not evaluated or not reported

NA Not applicable

Outcome Measure Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score – Symptoms

Subscale

Author’s Last Name Xie

Title of the Article Cross cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score koos in Asians with knee osteoarthritis in Singapore

Year 2006

PubMed ID: 16814575

Reviewer’s Name Travis Hamilton

Date of Review 7.14.11

Content Validity

Reported that items were generated by team of experts NA

Reported that items were developed from patient input NA; cultural adaptation Reported that content was developed from statistical modeling NA

Evaluated floor and ceiling effect 1

If yes. <30% of sample scored at endpoint 1

Data normally distributed NA

Was the document translated using standard procedure? 1

If yes. How? Forward and reverse translations by separate

translators. Construct Validity

Correlated with a generic instrument/scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient English SF-36: PF = .40 RB = .21 BP = .44/Chinese SF-36 PF = .31 RB = .18 BP = .43

Correlated with theoretically similar scale 1

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient EQ-5D; Table 4. Uncorrelated with theoretically distinct scale NA

If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient English SF-36: RE = .14 MH = .23/Chinese SF-36 RE = .17 MH = .29

Tested specific hypothesis to demonstrate construct validity? NA

If yes. What is found? NA

Criterion Validity

Correlated with “gold standard” NA

Predictive of a future outcome NA

Internal Consistency

Evidence for acceptable internal consistency 1

(eg.. Cronbach’s α > .60)

Indicate value: α :Singapore English:, Symptoms = .70 Chinese: Symptoms = .64

Test-Retest Reliability

Evidence for test-retest reliability (eg.. ICC>.70) 1

Indicate value: ICC: Singapore English; Symptoms = .87

Chinese; Symptoms = .85 Testing interval (time between repeated measures) 6 days

Interrater Reliability

Evidence for interrater reliability (eg..Kappa > .60) NA Indicate Value:

Responsiveness

Group level statistics reported (eg. Effect size. Standardized response mean. Guyatt’s responsiveness index. Regression model) NA Report statistics: ES. SRM. Guyatt’s

Individual level statistics reported (eg. Minimal detectable change.

Minimum clinically important change) NA

Report statistics:

Change in measure related to change in external standard NA Measure demonstrated change for patients who received known

efficacious treatment (indicate statistic) NA Time interval between baseline and follow-up assessments NA Descriptive Features

Singapore English Chinese

Age range of sample 65.3 67.8

Number: 127 (test-retest = 47) 131 (test-retest = 55)

Sex Male 30 15 Female 97 116 Diagnosis ACL injury/surgery PCL injury/surgery Other ligament injury/surgery + ACL Meniscus. Articuler artroscopy +ACL OA 1

PF General knee pain Combined injury Sport related Cartilage degeneration or surgery

Provide normative data NA

Provide information about scoring and weighting of items: NA

Provided information about calculating with missing values: 1; no missing items

Recall period (eg. “in the last month”) Present

Language(s) of instrument used in this report 1; Chinese and Singapore English Is this the first or primary report about this instrument? 2