ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2018
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Simplified Chinese version of Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) for total hip arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and standardised assessment of Chinese cross-cultural adapted hip Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Article
- Translation and validation of a simplified Chinese version of the psychosocial assessment tool.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
- Reliability and validity of Simplified Chinese version of Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire: cross-cultural adaptation and validation.Clinical rheumatology · 2019Article
- The Brazilian hip and groin outcome score (HAGOS-Br): cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties.Brazilian journal of physical therapyArticle
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
backgroundTo translate and cross-culturally adapt the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) into a Simplified Chinese version (HAGOS-C) and evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the HAGOS-C in total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients.
methodsThe cross-cultural adaptation was performed according to the internationally recognized guidelines of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Outcome Committee. A total of 192 participants were recruited in this study. The intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to determine reliability. Construct validity was analyzed by evaluating the correlations between HAGOS-C and EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D), as well as the short form (36) health survey (SF-36). Responsiveness of HAGOS-C was evaluated according to standard response means (SRM) and standard effect size (ES) between the first test and the third test (6 months after primary THA).
resultsThe original version of the HAGOS was well cross-culturally adapted and translated into Simplified Chinese. HAGOS-C was indicated to have excellent reliability (ICC = 0.748-0.936, Cronbach's alpha = 0.787-0.886). Moderate to substantial correlations between subscales of HAGOS-C and EQ-5D (r = 0.544-0.751, p < 0.001), as well as physical function (r = 0.567-0.640, p < 0.001), role physical (r = 0.570-0.613, p < 0.001), bodily pain (r = 0.467-0.604, p < 0.001), and general health (r = 0.387-0.432, p < 0.001) subscales of SF-36, were observed. The ES of 0.805-1.100 and SRM of 1.408-2.067 revealed high responsiveness of HAGOS-C.
conclusionsHAGOS-C was demonstrated to have excellent acceptability, reliability, validity, and responsiveness in THA, which could be recommended for patients in mainland China.
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.