Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36721146›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2023

A novel method for the translation and cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life patient-reported outcome measurements.

Catherine J P Teig, Malcolm J Bond, Margreth Grotle, Møyfrid Kjøllesdal, Susan Saga, Milada S Cvancarova, Marie A Ellström Engh, Angelita Martini

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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.

Catherine J P TeigThe Pelvic Floor Centre, Division of Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. chpl@ahus.no.
Malcolm J BondSchool of Medicine, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
Margreth GrotleFaculty of Health Science, OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
Møyfrid KjøllesdalDrammens Gynaecology Private Clinic, Drammen, Norway.
Susan SagaDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Milada S CvancarovaDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Marie A Ellström EnghDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway.
Angelita MartiniSchool of Population and Global Health, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.

Funding

The Division of Surgery and the Strategic Research Foundation, Akershus University Hospital funded this study. No grant ID number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis paper presents a novel methodology for translation and cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality-of-life patient-reported outcome measures, incorporating the Delphi method. Specifically, we describe the process of translating the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire-7 from English to Norwegian using this method.

methodsThe multistep translation method combined the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life guidelines, an Expert Panel review, and the Delphi method. It comprised two independent forward- and back-translations. While the bilingual pelvic floor Expert Panel ensured rigorous cross-checking and effective cross-cultural adaptation, the addition of the Delphi method (comprising the attributes of anonymity, controlled feedback, and statistical group response) further established consensus on translated items. OUTCOMES: The application of the Delphi method in the Expert Panel phase proved adequate in producing comprehensible intermediate Norwegian versions ready for pilot testing. The Expert Panel reviewed the comments made by patients completing the instruments and offered advice to allow final translated versions to be produced and tested for measurement properties. This iterative approach, internal logic, and anonymity between rounds improved the evaluations that the panel members provided, which in turn enhanced the final translated Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs).

conclusionsTo our knowledge, this work represents the first demonstration of the application of an Expert Panel review incorporating a Delphi method to assess health-related quality-of-life instruments. The controlled feedback approach, iterative nature, internal logic, and anonymity of the Delphi consensus method appeared to ensure a good cross-cultural adaptation of these PROMs.

Indexed as

Cross-Cultural ComparisonQuality of LifeConsensusHumansPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresTranslationsCross-cultural adaptationDelphi methodExpert panelPelvic floor dysfunctionPFDI-20PFIQ-7Translation

Identifiers

PMID36721146
PMCPMC9890781

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.