ReviewShoulder & elbow2017
Assessment of cross-cultural adaptations of patient-reported shoulder outcome measures in Spanish: a systematic review.
Review in Shoulder & elbow, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Distal Radius Fractures Validated for Spanish and Culture? A Systematic Review.The Journal of hand surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Psychometric analysis of the questionnaires for the assessment of upper limbs available in their Italian version: a systematic review of the structural and psychometric characteristics.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Pooled it
- Cross-cultural adaptions and measurement properties of the WORC (Western Ontario rotator cuff index): a systematic review.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2020Pooled it
- Outcome Measurement in Shoulder Diseases: Focus on Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI).Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- Does preoperative glenoid bony defect determine final coracoid graft positioning in arthroscopic Latarjet?JSES international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe present study aimed to conduct a systematic review of self-administered shoulder-disability functional assessment questionnaires adapted to Spanish, analyzing the quality of the transcultural adaptation and the clinimetric properties of the new version.
methodsA search of the main biomedical databases was conducted to locate Spanish shoulder function assessment scales. The authors reviewed the papers and considered whether the process of adaptation of the questionnaire had followed international recommendations, and whether its psychometric properties had been appropriately assessed.
resultsThe search identified nine shoulder function assessment scales adapted to Spanish: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH), Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index (WORC), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index (WOSI) and Wheelchair Users Shoulder Pain Index (WUSPI). The DASH was adapted on three occasions and the SPADI on two. The transcultural adaptation procedure was generally satisfactory, albeit somewhat less rigorous for the SDQ and WUSPI. Reliability was analyzed in all cases. Validity was not measured for one of the adaptations of the DASH, nor was it measured for the SDQ.
conclusionsThe transcultural adaptation was satisfactory and the psychometric properties analyzed were similar to both the original version and other versions adapted to other languages.
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.