ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2015
The reliability and validity of the English version of the Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire for people with rheumatoid arthritis.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05244824 (Adaptation of Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Adaptation of Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire (EDAQ) Into Turkish, Examining The Reliability and Validity For People With Rheumatoid Arthritis
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of arthritis gloves on people with Rheumatoid Arthritis or Inflammatory Arthritis with hand pain: a study protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial (the A-GLOVES trial).BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2017Trial
- Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Dutch and German versions of the Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire in people with rheumatoid arthritis.Rheumatology international · 2021Article
- The Valued Life Activities Scale (VLAs): linguistic validation, cultural adaptation and psychometric testing in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in the UK.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Supporting construct validity of the Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire using Linear Logistic Test Models.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Measure of activity performance of the hand (MAP-Hand) questionnaire: linguistic validation, cultural adaptation and psychometric testing in people with rheumatoid arthritis in the UK.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Article
- Linguistic validation, validity and reliability of the British English versions of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and QuickDASH in people with rheumatoid arthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Article
- A principal factor analysis to characterize agricultural exposures among Nebraska veterans.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe Evaluation of Daily Activity Questionnaire (EDAQ) includes 138 items in 14 domains identified as important by people with RA. The aim of this study was to test the validity and reliability of the English EDAQ.
methodsA total of 502 participants completed two questionnaires 3 weeks apart. The first consisted of the EDAQ, HAQ, RA Quality of Life (RAQoL) and the Medical Outcomes Scale (MOS) 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36v2), and the second consisted of the EDAQ only. The 14 EDAQ domains were tested for: unidimensionality-using confirmatory factor analysis; fit, response dependency, invariance across groups (differential item functioning)-using Rasch analysis; internal consistency [Person Separation Index (PSI)]; concurrent validity-by correlations with the HAQ, SF-36v2 and RAQoL; and test-retest reliability (Spearman's correlations).
resultsConfirmatory factor analysis of the 14 EDAQ domains indicated unidimensionality, after adjustment for local dependency in each domain. All domains achieved a root mean square error of approximation <0.10 and satisfied Rasch model expectations for local dependency. DIF by age, gender and employment status was largely absent. The PSI was consistent with individual use (PSI = 0.94 for all 14 domains). For all domains, except Caring, concurrent validity was good: HAQ (rs = 0.72-0.91), RAQoL (rs = 0.67-0.82) and SF36v2 Physical Function scale (rs = -0.60 to -0.84) and test-retest reliability was good (rs = 0.70-0.89).
conclusionAnalysis supported a 14-domain, two-component structure (Self care and Mobility) of the EDAQ, where each domain, and both components, satisfied Rasch model requirements, and have robust reliability and validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.