The methodological requirements for clinical examination and patient-reported outcomes, and how to test them.

J Hand Surg Eur Vol · Jan 2020 · Review

Rosales RS, Atroshi I

Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

Hand & Upper Extremity

SUMMARY — THE REDUCTIONThis methodological review outlines how reliability, validity, and responsiveness should be rigorously assessed when evaluating clinical exams and patient-reported outcome measures in hand surgery research.
Abstract, as published

This article presents the methodological requirements for clinical examination and patient-reported outcomes measurements. The assessment of any measurement for clinical research in hand surgery is difficult. A method of measuring a criterion could be 100% reliable but 100% invalid. Bias may be present in our assessment if we do not take into account the methodological requirements related to reliability, validity, and responsiveness of our measures. Reliability refers to intra-observer agreement, inter-observer agreement, or agreement between two methods of assessment, and, for patient-reported measures, internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Validity is the capability of a clinical method to measure what it proposes to measure. Assessing validity involves comparing a measure with one or more other measures, and, if possible, with a reference standard criterion. Responsiveness is the ability to detect important clinical change. The Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments provides the standards required for design and recommended statistical analyses of patient-reported outcome measures.

Featured in the 2026-07-30 issue.

← Teaching Hand Surgery in the Developing World: Utilizing Educ…Our Disagreement on "Iceberg View" on the Ulnar Wrist and Cli… →

The Reduction is a free email digest of newly published orthopaedic literature — a handful of new papers in the subspecialties you choose, each summarized like this one. Subscribe free or browse the archive.