•Affective outcomes were mostly studied.•Self-reported measures were mostly applied.•Producing artifacts is an essential characteristic of project-based learning.•Artifacts were less used in the ...evaluation of project-based learning.
Project-based learning (PjBL) is understood to be a promising approach that improves student learning in higher education. Empirical studies on project-based learning have been reviewed with a focus on student outcomes. Affective outcomes (i.e. perceptions of the benefits of PjBL and perceptions of the experience of PjBL) were most applied, which were measured by questionnaires, interviews, observation, and self-reflection journals. Cognitive outcomes (i.e. knowledge and cognitive strategies) and behavioral outcomes (i.e. skills and engagement) were measured by questionnaires, rubrics, tests, interviews, observation, self-reflection journals, artifacts, and log data. The outcome of artifact performance was assessed by rubrics. Future research should investigate more about students’ learning processes and final products. Measurement instruments and data analyses should also be improved.
This study aims to develop an instrument to measure Sharia students’ perception of the Khilafah. The research applied the ADDIE development research approach. The activity began with reviewing ...Taqiyuddin An-Nabhani’s books and articles about Khilafah to get the instrument construct (analysis). The next stage was to compile the grid and assemble the instrument items (design). The items of the assembled instrument were then assessed by 11 experts (development). The validated Instruments were then carried out with limited and expanded trials. The limited trial was conducted on 26 students at Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Salatiga, and the expanded trial was conducted on 227 Sharia students from Institut Islam Mamba’ul ‘Ulum (IIM) Surakarta, UIN Raden Mas Said, and UIN Salatiga. The experimental data were analyzed with CFA. The results indicate that the instrument construct consisted of seven aspects of measurement encompassing the essence, the function, the establishment, the power and sovereignty, the form of state and government, the Khilafah government system, and the constitution for non-Muslims. The measurement model meets eight model fit criteria, including AGFI = 0.84 ( 0.8), chi-square/df = 1.459 ( 2), RMR = 0.054 (≤ 0.1), SRMR = 0.056 (≤ 0.1), RMSEA = 0.045 ( 0.08), NFI = 0.95 (≥ 0.9), NNFI = 0.98 (≥ 0.9), CFI = 0.98 (≥ 0.9), IFI = 0.98 (≥ 0.9). The instrument also has a good guarantee of validity and reliability. This is indicated by the loading factor value of each indicator above 0.4 and the composite reliability value of 0.95 ( 0.7) so that the instrument can be used for further measurements.
Background and objective
Central sensitization (CS) is a phenomenon associated with several medical diagnoses, including postcancer pain, low back pain, osteoarthritis, whiplash, and fibromyalgia. CS ...involves an amplification of neural signaling within the central nervous system that results in pain hypersensitivity. The purpose of this systematic review was to gather published studies of a widely used outcome measure (the Central Sensitization Inventory CSI), determine the quality of evidence these publications reported, and examine the measurement properties of the CSI.
Databases and data treatment
Four databases were searched for publications from 2011 (when the CSI was developed) to July 2017. The Consensus‐Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist was applied to evaluate methodological quality and risk of bias. In instances when COSMIN did not offer a scoring system for measurement properties, qualitative analyses were performed.
Results
Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria. Quality of evidence examined with the COSMIN checklist was determined to be good to excellent for all studies for their respective measurement property reports. Interpretability measures were consistent when publications were analyzed qualitatively, and construct validity was strong when examined alongside other validated measures relating to CS.
Conclusions
An assessment of the published measurement studies of the CSI suggest the tool generates reliable and valid data that quantify the severity of several symptoms of CS.
Purpose The original COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was developed to assess the methodological quality of single studies on ...measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). Now it is our aim to adapt the COSMIN checklist and its four-point rating system into a version exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs, aiming to assess risk of bias of studies on measurement properties. Methods For each standard (i.e., a design requirement or preferred statistical method), it was discussed within the COSMIN steering committee if and how it should be adapted. The adapted checklist was pilot-tested to strengthen content validity in a systematic review on the quality of PROMs for patients with hand osteoarthritis. Results Most important changes were the reordering of the measurement properties to be assessed in a systematic review of PROMs; the deletion of standards that concerned reporting issues and standards that not necessarily lead to biased results; the integration of standards on general requirements for studies on item response theory with standards for specific measurement properties; the recommendation to the review team to specify hypotheses for construct validity and responsiveness in advance, and subsequently the removal of the standards about formulating hypotheses; and the change in the labels of the four-point rating system. Conclusions The COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist was developed exclusively for use in systematic reviews of PROMs to distinguish this application from other purposes of assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties, such as guidance for designing or reporting a study on the measurement properties.
•Empowerment in pregnancy and childbirth was redefined as a capability to make strategic life decisions.•Some scoping or systematic reviews provided limited guidance on the selection and utilization ...of instruments to measure pregnant women's empowerment.•There were heterogeneous results regarding the appraisal content and psychometric properties of the 13 instruments.•Kameda's prenatal empowerment scale may be deemed a suitable instrument.•The 13 instruments comprehensively measured the attributes of empowerment, with a particular focus on facilitating women's choice and decision-making.
The empowerment of pregnant women is a meaningful strategy that profoundly impacts the health of women and their children. Despite a significant increase in the empowerment of pregnant women and its measurement, little attention was given to a consensus on the selection and application of assessment instruments used for pregnant women.
To identify the available assessment instruments for measuring the empowerment of pregnant women and to describe the appraisal content and their psychometric properties.
We searched nine bibliographic databases for original studies that focus on the measurement of empowerment in pregnant women. Arksey and O'Malley's methodology and PRISMA-ScR were selected to guide the implementation of this scoping review. The COSMIN criteria was employed to assess the methodological quality and the quality of psychometric properties.
A total of 23 studies were included and 13 instruments were extracted. Given comprehensive considerations, Kameda's prenatal empowerment scale may be deemed suitable. The included instruments comprehensively measured the attributes of empowerment, with a particular focus on facilitating women's choice and decision-making. Except for the four most recent self-designed questionnaires, the remaining instruments had been tested for reliability and/or validity.
There were heterogeneous results regarding the included instruments’ appraisal content and psychometric properties. Future studies focusing on the development or validation of measurement instruments should be guided by influential and identical standards.
Therapist responsiveness is an emerging construct in psychotherapy research that still lacks a clear definition and, consequently, a unique operationalization. Indeed, there is a great overlap ...between therapist responsiveness and other variables, such as attunement, flexibility, and empathy. This overlap inevitably hinders the assessment of the therapist’s responsiveness, although it is crucial for the effectiveness of the treatments. Therefore, the current systematic review aims at exploring the different methodologies of measurement and analysis of therapist responsiveness, including both direct and indirect instruments. The results confirmed difficulties and divergences in the operationalization of the construct, as shown by the great heterogeneity found in the choice and use of the tools. Furthermore, this review provides guidance for future research, clinical practice, and training of therapists.
Scores on an outcome measurement instrument depend on the type and settings of the instrument used, how instructions are given to patients, how professionals administer and score the instrument, etc. ...The impact of all these sources of variation on scores can be assessed in studies on reliability and measurement error, if properly designed and analyzed. The aim of this study was to develop standards to assess the quality of studies on reliability and measurement error of clinician-reported outcome measurement instruments, performance-based outcome measurement instrument, and laboratory values.
We conducted a 3-round Delphi study involving 52 panelists.
Consensus was reached on how a comprehensive research question can be deduced from the design of a reliability study to determine how the results of a study inform us about the quality of the outcome measurement instrument at issue. Consensus was reached on components of outcome measurement instruments, i.e. the potential sources of variation. Next, we reached consensus on standards on design requirements (n = 5), standards on preferred statistical methods for reliability (n = 3) and measurement error (n = 2), and their ratings on a four-point scale. There was one term for a component and one rating of one standard on which no consensus was reached, and therefore required a decision by the steering committee.
We developed a tool that enables researchers with and without thorough knowledge on measurement properties to assess the quality of a study on reliability and measurement error of outcome measurement instruments.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
To standardize outcome reporting in clinical trials of patients with nonspecific low back pain, an international multidisciplinary panel recommended physical functioning, pain intensity, and ...health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as core outcome domains. Given the lack of a consensus on measurement instruments for these 3 domains in patients with low back pain, this study aimed to generate such consensus. The measurement properties of 17 patient-reported outcome measures for physical functioning, 3 for pain intensity, and 5 for HRQoL were appraised in 3 systematic reviews following the COSMIN methodology. Researchers, clinicians, and patients (n = 207) were invited in a 2-round Delphi survey to generate consensus (≥67% agreement among participants) on which instruments to endorse. Response rates were 44% and 41%, respectively. In round 1, consensus was achieved on the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1a for physical functioning (78% agreement) and the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for pain intensity (75% agreement). No consensus was achieved on any HRQoL instrument, although the Short Form 12 (SF12) approached the consensus threshold (64% agreement). In round 2, a consensus was reached on an NRS version with a 1-week recall period (96% agreement). Various participants requested 1 free-to-use instrument per domain. Considering all issues together, recommendations on core instruments were formulated: Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1a or 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for physical functioning, NRS for pain intensity, and SF12 or 10-item PROMIS Global Health form for HRQoL. Further studies need to fill the evidence gaps on the measurement properties of these and other instruments.
Keywords: Systematic review, economic literacy, measurement instruments • Measurement instruments often represent only one domain at a time. • The focus of test instruments is on querying declarative ...knowledge. • Authentic assessments are rarely being used. Purpose: This paper analyses and classifies currently available English- and German-language measurement instruments for assessing economic literacy. It shows the content-related focuses and gaps of the extracted test instruments, the cognitive level of demand that characterises the instruments, the technical forms of implementation, and the extent to which the lifeworld contexts of test participants were considered. Method: The PSYNDEX, ERIC, German Education Index, and GESIS databases were systematically reviewed, and measurement instruments were examined based on four perspectives of analysis: economic subject dimension, learning psychology, assessment formats and technical design, and authenticity. Findings: Knowledge tests differ substantially from each other. Rather than representing all domains of the subject of economics equally, test instruments usually measure only one domain at a time. The focus of test instruments is on the retrieval of declarative knowledge. Measurement instruments were developed for adults and young people in equal parts. While some test instruments are related to the real world, authentic assessments are an exception.
Cognitive deficits are common after brain injury and can be measured in various ways. Many neuropsychological tests are designed to measure specific cognitive deficits, and self-report questionnaires ...capture cognitive complaints. Measuring cognition in daily life is important in rehabilitating the abilities required to undertake daily life activities and participate in society. However, assessment of cognition in daily life is often performed in a non-standardized manner. In this opinion paper we discuss the various types of assessment of cognitive functioning and their associated instruments. Drawing on existing literature and evidence from experts in the field, we propose a framework that includes seven dimensions of cognition measurement, reflecting a continuum ranging from controlled test situations through to measurement of cognition in daily life environments. We recommend multidimensional measurement of cognitive functioning in different categories of the continuum for the purpose of diagnostics, evaluation of cognitive rehabilitation treatment, and assessing capacity after brain injury.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
