Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26370833›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2015

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of yoruba version of the short-form 36 health survey.

Chidozie Emmanuel Mbada, Gafar Atanda Adeogun, Michael Opeoluwa Ogunlana, Rufus Adesoji Adedoyin, Adesanmi Akinsulore, Taofeek Oluwole Awotidebe, Opeyemi Ayodiipo Idowu, Olumide Ayoola Olaoye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Vitality Revisited: The Evolving Concept of Flourishing and Its Relevance to Personal and Public Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

8 authors.

Chidozie Emmanuel MbadaDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria. doziembada@yahoo.com.
Gafar Atanda AdeogunDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria.
Michael Opeoluwa OgunlanaDepartment of Physiotherapy, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, Nigeria.
Rufus Adesoji AdedoyinDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria.
Adesanmi AkinsuloreDepartment of Mental Health, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria.
Taofeek Oluwole AwotidebeDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria.
Opeyemi Ayodiipo IdowuDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medical Sciences, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria.
Olumide Ayoola OlaoyeDepartment of Medical Rehabilitation, College of Health Sciences, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile - Ife, Nigeria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveThe Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is a valid quality of life tool often employed to determine the impact of medical intervention and the outcome of health care services. However, the SF-36 is culturally sensitive which necessitates its adaptation and translation into different languages. This study was conducted to cross-culturally adapt the SF-36 into Yoruba language and determine its reliability and validity.

methodsBased on the International Quality of Life Assessment project guidelines, a sequence of translation, test of item-scale correlation, and validation was implemented for the translation of the Yoruba version of the SF-36. Following pilot testing, the English and the Yoruba versions of the SF-36 were administered to a random sample of 1087 apparently healthy individuals to test validity and 249 respondents completed the Yoruba SF-36 again after two weeks to test reliability. Data was analyzed using Pearson's product moment correlation analysis, independent t-test, one-way analysis of variance, multi trait scaling analysis and Intra-Class Correlation (ICC) at p < 0.05.

resultsThe concurrent validity scores for scales and domains ranges between 0.749 and 0.902 with the highest and lowest scores in the General Health (0.902) and Bodily Pain (0.749) scale. Scale-level descriptive result showed that all scale and domain scores had negative skewness ranging from -2.08 to -0.98. The mean scores for each scales ranges between 83.2 and 88.8. The domain scores for Physical Health Component and Mental Health Component were 85.6 ± 13.7 and 85.9 ± 15.4 respectively. The convergent validity was satisfactory, ranging from 0.421 to 0.907. Discriminant validity was also satisfactory except for item '1'. The ICC for the test-retest reliability of the Yoruba SF-36 ranges between 0.636 and 0.843 for scales; and 0.783 and 0.851 for domains.

conclusionThe data quality, concurrent and discriminant validity, reliability and internal consistency of the Yoruba version of the SF-36 are adequate and it is recommended for measuring health-related quality of life among Yoruba population.

Indexed as

Health StatusHealth Status IndicatorsQuality of LifeAdultAgedCross-Cultural ComparisonFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNigeriaOutcome Assessment, Health CarePainPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID26370833
PMCPMC5439226

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.