ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2021
A Japanese translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic and content validity confirmation of the Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Polish translation, cultural adaptation, and validity confirmation of the Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Associations of nutrition impact symptoms with depression in patients with advanced cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Assessment of nutritional status of oncology patients at hospital admission: A Portuguese real-world study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA
methodsIn accordance with methodology used in previous Dutch, Thai, German, and Norwegian PG-SGA studies, we followed the ten steps of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles of Good Practice for Translation and Cultural Adaptation for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. The study enrolled 50 patients and 50 healthcare professionals (HCPs) to evaluate the comprehensibility and difficulty of the translated and culturally adapted PG-SGA. The HCPs also evaluated the content validity of the translation. We evaluated each item and quantified scale indices for content validity (item content validity index (I-CVI), scale content validity index (S-CVI)), comprehensibility (item comprehensibility index (I-CI), scale comprehensibility index (S-CI)), and difficulty (item difficulty index (I-DI), scale difficulty index (S-DI)).
resultsPatients evaluated the comprehensibility and difficulty of the patient component as excellent (S-CI = 0.97, S-DI = 0.96). The professionals rated the Japanese version of both components of the PG-SGA as very relevant (S-CVI = 0.94). The professionals evaluated the comprehensibility of the professional component as being acceptable (S-CI = 0.88) but difficult (S-DI = 0.69), based predominantly on items related to physical examination (I-DI = 0.33-0.67).
conclusionThe PG-SGA was systematically translated and culturally adapted for the Japanese setting according to the ISPOR process. The Japanese version of the PG-SGA was perceived as comprehensive, easy to use, and relevant. Perceived difficulty in professional components, specifically in the context of metabolic demand and physical examination, will require appropriate training for professionals in order to optimize implementation.
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.