hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Effects of method of translation of patient-reported health outcome questionnaires: a randomized study of the translation of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life (RAQoL) Instrument for Sweden
Department of Health Sciences, Lund University. (Forskningsmiljön PRO-CARE)ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2174-372X
Department of Rheumatology, Central Hospital, Falun.
Galen Research Ltd., Manchester.
Centre for Languages and Literature, Lund University.
Show others and affiliations
2010 (English)In: Value in Health, ISSN 1098-3015, E-ISSN 1524-4733, Vol. 13, no 4, 424-430 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

AIMS: To compare two versions of a questionnaire translated using forward-backward (FB) translation and dual-panel (DP) methodologies regarding preference of wording and psychometric properties.

METHODS: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life instrument was adapted into Swedish by two independent groups using FB and DP methodologies, respectively. Seven out of thirty resulting items were identical. Nonidentical items were evaluated regarding preference of wording by 23 bilingual Swedes, 50 people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and 2 lay panels (n = 11). Psychometric performance was assessed from a postal survey of 200 people with RA randomly assigned to complete one version first and the other 2 weeks later.

RESULTS: Preference did not differ among the 23 bilinguals (P = 0.196), whereas patients and lay people preferred DP over FB item versions (P < 0.0001). Postal survey response rates were 74% (FB) and 75% (DP). There were more missing item responses in the FB than the DP version (6.9% vs. 5.6%; P < 0.0001). Floor/ceiling effects were small (FB, 6.1/0%; DP, 4.4/0.7%) and reliability was 0.92 for both versions. Construct validity was similar for both versions. Differential item functioning by version was detected for five items but cancelled out and did not affect estimated person measures.

CONCLUSIONS: The DP approach showed advantages over FB translation in terms of preference by the target population and by lay people, whereas there were no obvious psychometric differences. This suggests advantages of DP over FB translation from the patients' perspective, and does not support the commonly held view that FB translation is the "gold standard."

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 13, no 4, 424-430 p.
Keyword [en]
outcomes research, patient-reported outcomes, quality of life, questionnaire development, translation
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-12782DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00677.xISI: 000279872300014PubMedID: 20070642OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-12782DiVA: diva2:743940
Available from: 2014-09-05 Created: 2014-08-29 Last updated: 2014-09-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hagell, Peter
In the same journal
Value in Health
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 46 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf