Data_Sheet_1_Measuring Change Over Time: A Systematic Review of Evaluative Measures of Cognitive Functioning in Traumatic Brain Injury.docx

Objectives: The purpose of evaluative instruments is to measure the magnitude of change in a construct of interest over time. The measurement properties of these instruments, as they relate to the instrument's ability to fulfill its purpose, determine the degree of certainty with which the results yielded can be viewed. This work systematically reviews all instruments that have been used to evaluate cognitive functioning in persons with traumatic brain injury (TBI), and critically assesses their evaluative measurement properties: construct validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness.
Data Sources: MEDLINE, Central, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO were searched from inception to December 2016 to identify longitudinal studies focused on cognitive evaluation of persons with TBI, from which instruments used for measuring cognitive functioning were abstracted. MEDLINE, instrument manuals, and citations of articles identified in the primary search were then screened for studies on measurement properties of instruments utilized at least twice within the longitudinal studies.
Study Selection: All English-language, peer-reviewed studies of longitudinal design that measured cognition in adults with a TBI diagnosis over any period of time, identified in the primary search, were used to identify instruments. A secondary search was carried out to identify all studies that assessed the evaluative measurement properties of the instruments abstracted in the primary search.
Data Extraction: Data on psychometric properties, cognitive domains covered and clinical utility were extracted for all instruments.
Results: In total, 38 longitudinal studies from the primary search, utilizing 15 instruments, met inclusion and quality criteria. Following review of studies identified in the secondary search, it was determined that none of the instruments utilized had been assessed for all the relevant measurement properties in the TBI population. The most frequently assessed property was construct validity.
Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence for the validity and reliability of instruments measuring cognitive functioning, longitudinally, in persons with TBI. Several instruments with well-defined construct validity in TBI samples warrant further assessment for test-retest reliability and responsiveness.
Registration Number:www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42017055309.

研究目标：评估工具的核心用途为量化特定目标构念随时间推移产生的变化幅度。此类工具的测量学属性，与其实现既定用途的能力直接相关，决定了研究结果可被采信的置信程度。本研究对所有曾用于评估创伤性脑损伤（Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI）患者认知功能的工具开展系统性综述，并严格批判性评估其评估性测量学属性：构念效度（construct validity）、重测信度（test-retest reliability）及反应性（responsiveness）。
数据来源：本研究检索了MEDLINE、Cochrane中央对照试验资料库（Central）、EMBASE、Scopus及PsycINFO数据库，检索时限自建库起至2016年12月，以识别针对创伤性脑损伤患者认知评估的纵向研究，进而提取其中用于测量认知功能的工具。随后，针对首次检索中筛选出的文献、工具手册及相关引文，进一步检索以识别针对上述纵向研究中至少重复使用两次的工具的测量学属性相关研究。
研究筛选：首次检索中识别的所有英文同行评议纵向研究，需满足针对确诊创伤性脑损伤的成人群体开展认知测量且不限随访时长，以此提取相关工具。随后开展二次检索，以识别所有针对首次检索中提取的工具的评估性测量学属性的相关研究。
数据提取：针对所有工具，提取其心理测量学属性（psychometric properties）、覆盖的认知领域及临床实用性相关数据。
研究结果：首次检索中共纳入38项纵向研究，涉及15种工具，均符合纳入标准与质量评价标准。经二次检索文献审查后发现，现有研究未针对创伤性脑损伤人群评估上述所有工具的相关测量学属性。其中最常被评估的属性为构念效度。
研究结论：当前尚无充分证据支持用于纵向评估创伤性脑损伤患者认知功能的各类工具的效度与信度。部分在创伤性脑损伤样本中已明确构念效度的工具，仍需进一步开展重测信度与反应性相关评估。
注册编号：www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/，标识符为CRD42017055309。