Health-related quality of life instruments for older persons with osteoporosis: a WHO-BOHEG systematic review of measurement properties for use in clinical trials and routine practice

Journal Article

2026

Published in: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42117739/

Background: Osteoporosis increases fracture risk in older adults and is associated with impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments are widely used, but their measurement performance in older populations has not been comprehensively synthesised.

Objective: To systematically identify and synthesise development and validation studies of osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments for older adults, and to appraise their measurement properties using COSMIN criteria and a modified GRADE approach to inform instrument selection for clinical trials, routine care, and research.

Design: Systematic review.

Setting: Community-dwelling; Long-term care facility; Primary care facility.

Subjects: Older persons aged 60 years or over.

Methods: We searched Medline (Ovid), Embase, PsycINFO (Ovid), and AMED (Ovid) from inception to August 2024. We extracted and appraised evidence for COSMIN-defined measurement properties: content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity or measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, hypothesis testing for construct validity, and responsiveness. Methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, measurement properties were rated against COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties, and certainty of evidence was graded using a modified GRADE approach.

Results: Forty-three studies reported the development and/or validation of nine osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments; language and version adaptations resulted in 15 instrument variants. Content validity was the most prominent limitation: only OPTQoL and the English Mini-OQLQ demonstrated sufficient evidence for multiple content validity components, while most widely used instruments lacked adequate evidence on item relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Evidence for internal structure was limited, with structural validity sufficient for ECOS-16 and QoLOS-NVFX, insufficient for QUALEFFO-41, and indeterminate for most other instruments. Cross-cultural validity and measurement invariance were almost entirely unexamined. By contrast, reliability and hypothesis testing for construct validity were more consistently supported, often with moderate-to-high certainty. Measurement error, interpretability, and responsiveness were poorly reported across instruments.

Conclusions: The evidence base supports purpose-driven selection of osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments rather than a single preferred instrument. Across included studies, ECOS-16 shows the most consistently supported measurement properties in older adults for longitudinal assessment, although important evidence gaps remain (notably measurement error and cross-cultural validity). When brevity is the primary feasibility constraint in routine care, the Mini-OQLQ may be considered; however, evidence for responsiveness is limited.

• Publisher Name: Age & Ageing