Background
Methods
Scoping search and preliminary research
Identification of relevant studies
-
ICECAP-O
-
ICEPOP
-
Investigating Choice Experiments
Study selection
-
published as a conference abstract only (no full text available);
-
not published in English;
-
Provided a commentary only or reported a study design other than an assessment of psychometric properties or an economic evaluation;
-
a full-text paper that did not contain at least one of the search terms of interest, in the title, abstract or main body of the paper.
-
assessed the psychometric properties of the ICECAP-O;
-
used the ICECAP-O to measure outcomes for economic evaluation (including pilot and feasibility trials);
Data extraction
Analysis plan
-
Investigating psychometric properties of ICECAP-O
-
Reporting use of the ICECAP-O in economic evaluation
-
Validity (further defined as: criterion, content and construct)
-
Reliability (commonly test–retest)
-
Responsiveness (defined as the ability of a measure to detect clinically important changes resulting from an intervention [13])
-
p > 0.1: no significant evidence of a relationship
-
0.1 ≥ p > 0.01: weak evidence of a relationship
-
p ≤ 0.01: strong evidence of a relationship
Results
Search results and study selection
Studies assessing the psychometric properties of ICECAP-O
Overview of studies
Construct Validity
Comparator | Evidence (statistical significance) of relationship with overall capability [statements in square brackets indicate the degree to which the results were in line with the hypothesis] |
---|---|
Socio-demographic characteristics | |
Increased age | Negative [NH] [42] ICECAP-O does not discriminate between over and under 65’s [NH] [28] |
Living with others | None [positive expected] [28] Positive [expected] [29] None [NH] [42] |
Living with marital partner | None [positive expected] [28] |
Generic health measures (index score) | |
EQ-5D-3L or 5L | Positive strong [expected] [36] Positive [expected] [34] Positive [expected] [39] Positive [expected] [33] Positive [NH] [42] |
Physical health/independence | |
Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) | ICECAP-O discriminates between IADL dependent and non-IADL dependent elderly [expected] [39] |
Barthel activities of daily living (ADL) Index | Positive strong [expected] [35] |
Mental health (non-dementia) | |
Geriatric depression scale-15 | Negative strong [NH] [36] Negative [expected] [39] |
Cognitive impairment | |
Alzheimer Disease Related Quality of Life (ADRQL) | |
Well-being | |
Cantril’s ladder | Positive strong [NH] [36] |
Environment and care quality | |
Multiple deprivation scores of electoral ward | None [negative weak expected] [29] |
Content validity
Paper | Findings | Population group |
---|---|---|
Haywood et al. (2014) [18] | Relevance: ICECAP domains considered to be not important or relevant | Clinical trial of patients with hip fracture (UK) |
Horwood et al. (2014) [19] | Relevance: Some participants questioned why ‘love and friendship’ and ‘thinking about the future without concern’ were relevantHowever, they were focusing on the relevance to their operation | Patients undergoing joint replacement surgery (UK) |
Van Leeuwen et al. (2015a) [21] | Relevance: Some participants narrowly interpreted ‘Attachment’ and ‘Security’ items respondents tending to concentrate on one aspect of a domain | Dutch older adults |
Hörder et al. (2016) [23] | Relevance: Participants gave their highest relevance rating to Attachment and lowest to Enjoyment | Swedish 70-year-olds |
Jones et al. 2014 [20] | Four themes were identified: social network and relationships; interactions with agencies; recognition of role; and time for oneself. All overlap with ICECAP-O domains | Carers of people with dementia (UK) |
Milne et al. (2014) [15] | Several caregivers criticised the ICECAP-O for having questions that did not seem relevant | Carers of people with dementia (UK) |
Responsiveness
Study | Anchor used to assess responsiveness | Findings |
---|---|---|
Keeley (2014) [16] | EQ-5D-3L EQ-5D-3L VAS Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) SF-36 sub-scale scores | Responsive in an RCT of blood pressure management for former stroke patients |
Flynn et al. [17] | WOMAC score | Responsive among those undergoing total joint replacement (hip or knee) |
Davis et al. (2017) [22] | Number of falls | Responsive among older adults with impaired mobility (fallen within last 12 months) particularly among those with mild cognitive impairment at baseline |
Parsons et al. (2014) [24] | Oxford hip score | Not responsive amongst hip fracture patients undergoing surgery except at four weeks |
Van Leeuwen et al. (2015b) [26] | Health global rating scale, Katz index of independence in activities of daily living, SF-12, quality of life global rating scale, Pearlin mastery scale, client-centred care questionnaire | Among frail older people receiving care mental health was most strongly associated with ICECAP-O over time |