Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37857372›Full record

ReviewGlobal spine journal2024

Assessing Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire 2.0: A Methodological Systematic Review Regard to Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments Guideline.

Liang Qiao, Dingbang Chen, Fan Zhang, Luosheng Zhang, Xin Gao, Jiajia Chen, Wenlong Yu, Jingren Xu, Peilin Chu, Quan Huang and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Global spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Development and psychometric validation of the short-form thai version of the spine oncology study group outcomes questionnaire (TH-SOSGOQ-8D).European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors.

Liang QiaoShanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Dingbang ChenDepartment of Orthopaedics Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Fan ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Luosheng ZhangDepartment of Orthopaedics Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Xin GaoDepartment of Orthopaedics Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Jiajia ChenDepartment of Spine Surgery, Affiliated Hospital 2 of Nantong University, Nantong University, Nantong.
Wenlong YuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jingren XuShanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Peilin ChuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Maanshan General Hospital of Ranger-Duree Healthcare, Maanshan, China.ORCID 0000-0002-4825-0637
Quan HuangDepartment of Orthopaedics Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Naval Medical University, Shanghai, China.
Mengchen YinDepartment of Orthopaedics, Longhua Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7404-1495

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

designsystematic review of cross-cultural adaptation.

objectivesSOSGOQ 2.0 was widely used to assess the HRQQOL of patients with spinal metastasis. Due to the lack of methodological quality assessment, it is a challenge to use the questionnaire in routine practice. This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the translation procedures and measurement attributes of SOSGOQ 2.0 according to COSMIN guidelines.

methodsThe literature was reviewed adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Each translation process and different cultural adaptation methods were classified according to the guidelines for Cross cultural Adaptation Process of Self Reporting Measures, and the methodological quality of the identified research was evaluated according to the consensus based on the selection criteria of health measurement tools.

results6 publications finally met the inclusion criteria. As for the evaluation of translation procedures and cross-cultural adaptability, two adaptations did not report the detailed information in translation and cross-cultural adaptation (synthesis, back translation, review by expert committee, pre-test), factor analysis and sample size calculation were only mentioned in two studies, and only one adaptation met the minimum sample size standard. Regard to the methodological quality assessment of measurement attributes, all adaptations completed internal consistency, structural effectiveness and reliability. However, none of the adaptations reported measurement errors and only one reported response sensitivity.

conclusionsWe found that the methodological quality of the current adaptation was uneven, and the report of measurement attribute results was not comprehensive. We recommend higher quality German, Italian and Chinese adaptation.

Indexed as

adaptationconsensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instrumentscross-culturalspine oncology study group outcomes questionnaire 2.0systematic review

Identifiers

PMID37857372
PMCPMC11289545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.