Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22682500›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2012

Enhancing rigour in the validation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs): bridging linguistic and psychometric testing.

Gwerfyl Roberts, Seren Roberts, Richard Tranter, Rhiannon Whitaker, Emma Bedson, Siobhan Tranter, Delyth Prys, Heledd Owen, Yvonne Sylvestre

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Gwerfyl RobertsCentre for Health-Related Research, School of Healthcare Studies, Bangor University, Fron Heulog, Ffriddoedd Road, Bangor, Gwynedd, LL57 2EF, UK. gwerfyl.w.roberts@bangor.ac.uk
Seren Roberts
Richard Tranter
Rhiannon Whitaker
Emma Bedson
Siobhan Tranter
Delyth Prys
Heledd Owen
Yvonne Sylvestre

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA strong consensus exists for a systematic approach to linguistic validation of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and discrete methods for assessing their psychometric properties. Despite the need for robust evidence of the appropriateness of measures, transition from linguistic to psychometric validation is poorly documented or evidenced. This paper demonstrates the importance of linking linguistic and psychometric testing through a purposeful stage which bridges the gap between translation and large-scale validation.

findingsEvidence is drawn from a study to develop a Welsh language version of the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and investigate its psychometric properties. The BDI-II was translated into Welsh then administered to Welsh-speaking university students (n = 115) and patients with depression (n = 37) concurrent with the English BDI-II, and alongside other established depression and quality of life measures. A Welsh version of the BDI-II was produced that, on administration, showed conceptual equivalence with the original measure; high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90; 0.96); item homogeneity; adequate correlation with the English BDI-II (r = 0.96; 0.94) and additional measures; and a two-factor structure with one overriding dimension. Nevertheless, in the student sample, the Welsh version showed a significantly lower overall mean than the English (p = 0.002); and significant differences in six mean item scores. This prompted a review and refinement of the translated measure.

conclusionsExploring potential sources of bias in translated measures represents a critical step in the translation-validation process, which until now has been largely underutilised. This paper offers important findings that inform advanced methods of cross-cultural validation of PROMs.

Indexed as

LinguisticsOutcome Assessment, Health CareQuality of LifeAdolescentAdultBiasCross-Cultural ComparisonDepressive DisorderFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedPersonality InventoryPsychometricsReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID22682500
PMCPMC3418176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.