A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinimetric properties of the core outcome measurement instruments for clinical effectiveness trials of nutritional and metabolic interventions in critical illness (CONCISE)
Authors: Davies Thomas W , Kelly Eileen , Gassel Rob JJ van , de Poll Marcel van , Gunst Jan , Casaer Michael P , Christopher Kenneth B , Preiser Jean Charles , Hill Aileen , Gundogan Kursat , Reintam-Blaser Annika , Rousseau Anne-Françoise , Hodgson Carol , Needham Dale M , Schaller Stefan J , McClelland Thomas , Pilkington Joshua J , Sevin Carla M , Wischmeyer Paul E , Lee Zheng Yii , Govil Deepak , Chapple Lee-anne , Denehy Linda , Montejo-González Juan Carlos , Taylor Beth , Bear Danielle E , Pearse Rupert M , McNelly Angela , Prowle John , Puthucheary Zudin A 
Published: September 2023

Abstract
Background: CONCISE is an internationally agreed minimum set of outcomes for use in nutritional and metabolic clinical research in critically ill adults. Clinicians and researchers need to be aware of the clinimetric properties of these instruments and understand any limitations to ensure valid and reliable research. This systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the measurement instruments identified in CONCISE.
Methods: Four electronic databases were searched from inception to December 2022 (MEDLINE via Ovid, EMBASE via Ovid, CINAHL via Healthcare Databases Advanced Search, CENTRAL via Cochrane). Studies were included if they examined at least one clinimetric property of a CONCISE measurement instrument or recognised variation in adults ≥ 18 years with critical illness or recovering from critical illness in any language. The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures was used. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses were used in line with COSMIN guidance. The COSMIN checklist was used to evaluate the risk of bias and the quality of clinimetric properties. Overall certainty of the evidence was rated using a modified Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Narrative synthesis was performed and where possible, meta-analysis was conducted.
Results: A total of 4316 studies were screened. Forty-seven were included in the review, reporting data for 12308 participants. The Short Form-36 Questionnaire (Physical Component Score and Physical Functioning), sit-to-stand test, 6-metre walk test and Barthel Index had the strongest clinimetric properties and certainty of evidence. The Short Physical Performance Battery, Katz Index and handgrip strength had less favourable results. There was limited data for Lawson Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria. The risk of bias ranged from inadequate to very good. The certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to high.
Conclusions: Variable evidence exists to support the clinimetric properties of the CONCISE measurement instruments. We recommend using this review alongside CONCISE to guide outcome selection for future trials of nutrition and metabolic interventions in critical illness.
Trial registration: PROSPERO (CRD42023438187). Registered 21/06/2023.