ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Czech Version of the Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire: The Content Validity Part.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factor Validity and Generic Reliability of the Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire in the Czech Population.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ) is a widely used parent questionnaire for screening motor coordination disorders in children aged 5-15 years. Despite increasing motor difficulties in children, a validated version is lacking in Central Europe. In addition, previous studies pointed out that several DCDQ items were shown to be problematic in different cultural environments. We found that the majority of these studies did not assess the item's content validity approach for keeping the semantic form and linguistic intelligibility of the original items. Therefore, this study aimed to translate the DCDQ, determine the content validity of items, and adapt the DCDQ for Czech children aged 6-10 years, where the identification of motor difficulties is crucial. Back-translation was employed, and face validity was consulted with linguistic experts and occupational therapists. A sample of 25 bilingual parents and practitioners evaluated the translated version, with content validity assessed using the Content Validity Ratio coefficient (CVR). Initial CVR scores ranged from 0.6 to 1.0. Lower scores were found for items 14 and 15, which were shown to be problematic in previous studies. The reason for the lower content validity in these items was due to double negation. Following linguistic modifications, the CVR values improved (range: 0.87-1.0), indicating content and semantic stability. Our findings underscore the importance of considering content validity and language specificity, including issues like double negation, during cross-cultural questionnaire validation to mitigate potential psychometric concerns in the future. The adapted Czech version exhibits significant content validity, thereby warranting further validation of its psychometric properties.
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.