Conceptual Framework for Measuring Supply Chain Performance: An Innovative Approach

The process of developing appropriate supply chain performance measurement instruments is difficult due to the complexity of supply chains. This paper presents an overview and evaluation of the performance measurement instruments used in supply chain models. As a result it advances a framework for developing an innovative supply chain performance measurement instrument which is generally applicable and which incorporates single organisational measures with inter-organisational and supply chain measures. The instrument distinguishes between qualitative and quantitative performance measures. Finally, it proposes supply chain satisfaction balance/ imbalance, as a qualitative supply chain performance measure.Agribusiness, Industrial Organization,

Measurement instruments and policies in Africa

Measurement instruments are increasingly important in the contemporary government of African. They are central to the rise of economic performance as a tool for reforming development aid and states. This has led to the emergence of new intervention methods (including experimentation and quantification) and generated political reconfigurations. These tools mobilise specific knowledge and experts, and put states in ambiguous positions. States must respect the technical infrastructure of international interventions, but they are also able to manoeuvre into favourable positions, especially with respect to their populations. Instruments also make “infiltration” possible: international donors no longer impose conditions from the outside, but prefer to act from within African states through techniques, measurements, standards, evaluation tools and specific terminology

Methods used in the selection of instruments for outcomes included in core outcome sets have improved since the publication of the COSMIN/COMET guideline

Objectives: Once a core outcome set (COS) has been defined, it is important to achieve consensus on how these outcomes should be measured. The aims of this systematic review were to gain insight into the methods used to select outcome measurement instruments and to determine whether methods have improved following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN)/Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) guideline publication. Study Design and Setting: Eligible articles, which were identified from the annual COMET systematic review, concerned any COS development studies that provided a recommendation on how to measure the outcomes included in the COS. Data were extracted on the methods used to select outcome measurement instruments in accordance with the COSMIN/COMET guideline. Results: Of the 118 studies included in the review, 48% used more than one source of information when finding outcome measurement instruments, and 74% performed some form of quality assessment of the measurement instruments. Twenty-three studies recommended one single instrument for each core outcome included in the COS. Clinical experts and public representatives were involved in selecting instruments in 62% and 28% of studies, respectively. Conclusion: Methods used to select outcome measurement instruments have improved since the publication of the COSMIN/COMET guideline. Going forward, COS developers should ensure that recommended outcome measurement instruments have sufficient content validity. In addition, COS developers should recommend one instrument for each core outcome to contribute to the overarching goal of uniformity in outcome reporting

Measurement properties of quality of life measurement instruments for infants, children and adolescents with eczema: protocol for a systematic review

Background: Eczema is a common chronic or chronically relapsing skin disease that has a substantial impact on quality of life (QoL). By means of a consensus-based process, the Harmonising Outcome Measures in Eczema (HOME) initiative has identified QoL as one of the four core outcome domains to be assessed in all eczema trials. Few measurement instruments exist to measure QoL in infants and children with eczema, but there is a great variability in both content and quality (for example, reliability and validity) of the instruments used, and it is not always clear if the best instrument is being used. Therefore, the aim of the proposed research is a comprehensive systematic assessment of the measurement properties of the existing measurement instruments that were developed and/or validated for the measurement of patient-reported QoL in infants and children with eczema. Methods/Design: This study is a systematic review of the measurement properties of patient-reported measures of QoL developed and/or validated for infants and children with eczema. Medline via PubMed and EMBASE will be searched using a selection of relevant search terms. Eligible studies will be primary empirical studies evaluating, describing, or comparing measurement properties of QoL instruments for infants and children with eczema. Eligibility assessment and data abstraction will be performed independently by two reviewers. Evidence tables will be generated for study characteristics, instrument characteristics, measurement properties, and interpretability. The adequacy of the measurement properties will be assessed using predefined criteria. Methodological quality of studies will be assessed using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. A best evidence synthesis will be undertaken if more than one study has investigated a particular measurement property. Discussion: The proposed systematic review will produce a comprehensive assessment of measurement properties of existing QoL instruments in infants and children with eczema. We aim to identify one best currently available instrument to measure QoL in infants and/or children with eczema

Documenting Measurement Instruments for the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Version 1.0)

Measurement is the key to any quantitative science. Both the validity and the replicability of research findings hinge on the quality of the measurement instruments used. This is especially true for the social and behavioral sciences. Here, researchers o en investigate constructs such as personality, attitudes, values, intentions or behavior. Such 'latent' constructs cannot be directly observed but can only be inferred indirectly from the respondents' responses to a survey (i.e., items, scales, questionnaires or tests), which lends even greater importance to the quality of the measurement instruments used. For this reason, a thorough documentation of measurement instruments is an integral part of a transparent research practices. In this guideline, we list information that is crucial for the documentation of measurement instruments in surveys. The guideline is aligned with the quality standards for the documentation of measurement instruments in the social sciences (RatSWD, 2014) and with the standards for the documentation of psychological characteristics of the test evaluation system of the Test Board of the Federation of German Psychologists. Whereas some of these quality standards were developed for testing individuals in applied settings, our lists focuses specifically on documenting measurement instruments intended for social and behavior science research. In research, slightly di erent quality criteria apply compared to individual diagnostics

Current use and barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardised measures in physical therapy in the Netherlands

In many countries, the need for physical therapists to use standardised measures has been recognised and is recommended in clinical practice guidelines. Research has shown a lack of clinimetric knowledge and clinical application of measurement instruments in daily practice may hamper implementation of these guidelines. The aims of this study are 1) to investigate the current use of measurement instruments by Dutch physical therapists; 2) to investigate the facilitators and barriers in using measurement instruments