Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39230584›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Polish translation, cultural adaptation, and validity confirmation of the Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment.

Katarzyna Zabłocka-Słowińska, Joanna Pieczyńska, Anna Prescha, Maciej Bladowski, Damian Gajecki, Dorota Kamińska, Katarzyna Neubauer, Faith Ottery, Harriët Jager-Wittenaar

Erratum issuedAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Katarzyna Zabłocka-SłowińskaThe Faculty of Finance and Management, WSB Merito University in Wroclaw, Wroclaw, Poland. katarzyna.zablocka-slowinska@wroclaw.merito.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2313-5728
Joanna Pieczyńska *Department of Dietetics and Bromatology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9955-3523
Anna Prescha *Department of Dietetics and Bromatology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4620-8953
Maciej BladowskiDepartment of Internal and Occupational Diseases, Hypertension and Clinical Oncology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Damian GajeckiDepartment of Internal and Occupational Diseases, Hypertension and Clinical Oncology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Dorota KamińskaDepartment and Clinic of Nephrology and Transplantation Medicine, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Katarzyna NeubauerDepartment and Clinic of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland.
Faith OtteryOttery & Associates, LLC, Oncology Care Consultants, Chicago, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6295-5166
Harriët Jager-WittenaarResearch Group Healthy Ageing, Allied Health Care and Nursing, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3928-8075

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) is a validated nutritional screening, assessment, triage, and monitoring tool. The aim of this study was to perform translation, cultural adaptation, linguistic, and content validation of the translated and culturally adapted version of the PG-SGA for the Polish setting.

methodsThe study was performed in concordance with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Principles. Patients (n = 174) and healthcare professionals (HCPs, n = 188) participated in the study. Comprehensibility and difficulty were assessed by patients for the PG-SGA Short Form, and by HCPs for the professional component. Content validity was assessed for the full PG-SGA by HCPs only. Evaluations were operationalized by a 4-point scale. Item and scale indices were calculated using the average item ratings divided by the number of respondents. Item indices < 0.78 required further analysis of the item, while scale indices ≥ 0.90 were defined as excellent and 0.80-0.89 as acceptable.

resultsThe PG-SGA Short Form was rated as excellent for content validity (Scale-CVI = 0.90) by HCPs and easy to comprehend (Scale-CI = 0.96) and use (Scale-DI = 0.94) by patients. The professional component of the PG-SGA was perceived as acceptable for content validity (Scale-CVI = 0.80), comprehension (Scale-CI = 0.87), and difficulty (Scale-DI = 0.80). The physical exam was rated the least comprehensible and the most difficult, and with the lowest content validity. We found significant differences in scale indices (p < 0.05 for all) between HCPs with different professions and between those being familiar with PG-SGA and not.

conclusionTranslation and cultural adaptation of the PG-SGA for the Polish setting preserved the purpose and conceptual meaning of the original PG-SGA. Validation revealed that the Polish version of PG-SGA is well understood and easy to complete by patients and professionals, and is considered relevant by professionals. However, detailed results indicate the need for appropriate training of the Polish HCPs, especially physicians and nurses, mainly in the worksheets related to the metabolic demand and physical exam.

Indexed as

TranslationsAdultAgedFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition AssessmentPolandPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultPatient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment; Validity; Nutritional assessment; Malnutrition screeningPG-SGA

Identifiers

PMID39230584
PMCPMC11374856

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.