ArticlePloS one2020
Cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties of the French version of the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised (TAPES-R).
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Satisfaction with Prosthesis and Walking Ability among Trans-Tibial Prosthesis Users from Two Selected Rehabilitation Hospitals in Rwanda.Rwanda journal of medicine and health sciences · 2025Article
- Sport Participation Positively Associated with Balance Confidence and Well-being in Transtibial Amputees.International journal of exercise science · 2024Article
- Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (A-QUEST 2.0) in prosthesis users.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2022Article
- The client satisfaction with device: a Rasch validation of the Arabic version in patients with upper and lower limb amputation.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised (TAPES-R) is a self-administered questionnaire to measure multidimensional adjustment to a prosthetic limb. Our aim was to assess the validity and reliability of the French version of the TAPES-R (TAPES-R-F). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe cross-cultural adaptation was performed according to the recommendations. Factor analysis and Rasch analysis were also performed to allow comparison with the original English version. Construct validity was assessed by measuring the correlations between TAPES-R-F subscores and quality of life, pain, body image satisfaction, anxiety and depression. Internal consistency was measured with Cronbach's α. The standard error of measurement, smallest detectable change, Bland and Altman limits of agreement, and intraclass correlation were the measures of agreement and reliability.
resultsNo major difficulties were encountered throughout the trans-cultural adaptation process. The final version of the TAPES-R-F was well accepted and understood by the patients. According to the factor analysis, the satisfaction scale should be treated as a one-dimensional construct when used by French-speaking people and should not be separated into two separate subscales, functional and aesthetic, as is the case in the original English version. Our study confirmed that there is a strong relationship between biopsychosocial factors and adjustment to amputation. Cronbach's α > 0.8 for all the subscales. Reliability was good to excellent for all the subscales (ICCs between 0.61 and 0.89). The smallest detectable changes were 0.7, 0.8, 1.3, 0.4, and 1.8 (general adjustment, social adjustment, adjustment to limitation, activity restriction, and global satisfaction with the prosthesis).
conclusionsThe TAPES-R-F is a valid and reliable instrument to assess multidimensional adjustment of French-speaking lower limb amputees. This questionnaire can be used for both clinical assessment and research purposes.
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.