China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Sleep dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease
Published in Jeremy Playfer, John Hindle, Andrew Lees, Parkinson's Disease in the Older Patient, 2018
The first bedside scale for a comprehensive assessment of sleep problems is the PDSS which has now been used across the world for a bedside assessment of clinical aspects of sleep disabilities of PD.71,72 The PDSS is 15-question visual analog scale which can be administered easily at the bedside and has also undergone formal linguistic validation in Italy, Spain and Japan (seeFigure 9.4 on p. 209).72,88The PDSS has robust test–test reliability and good discriminatory power between patients with PD and healthy controls. Patients and caregivers respond to individual questions based on their experiences in the past week, and scores for each item range from 0 (symptom severe and always experienced) to 10 (free of symptoms). The maximum cumulative score for the PDSS is 150 (patient is free of all symptoms). The PDSS aims to distinguish between sleep-onset and sleep-maintenance insomnia (Questions 2 and 3 of the PDSS); nocturnal motor symptoms (Questions 10 to 13 of the PDSS); nocturnal restlessness, dystonia, and pain (Questions 4, 5, 10, and 11 of the PDSS); neuropsychiatric symptoms (Questions 6 and 7 of the PDSS); and nocturia (Questions 8 and 9 of the PDSS). Excessive day-time sleepiness is addressed by Question 15, while Question 14 addresses sleep refreshment. A total score below 90 or an individual item score below 6 is likely to indicate significant sleep disturbance. One criticism is that PDSS does not specifically address the issue of sleep disordered breathing and RBD and a modification has been suggested.77
Development of palliative medicine in the United Kingdom and Ireland
Published in Eduardo Bruera, Irene Higginson, Charles F von Gunten, Tatsuya Morita, Textbook of Palliative Medicine and Supportive Care, 2015
375 Acquadro C, Conway K, Giroudet C, Mear I (eds.). Linguistic Validation Manual for Health Assessments, 2nd edn. Lyon, France: MAPI Institute, 2012. 376 Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S et al. ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for trans-
Long-term patient-reported outcomes after anterior distraction osteogenesis of the maxilla in patients with cleft
Published in Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, 2023
Lina Yasin, Magnus Becker, Henry Svensson, Anna-Paulina Wiedel
A validated questionnaire that would be useful for the purpose of highlighting the subjective experience of the DO procedure was not at hand when the study was initiated. A custom-made questionnaire was therefore constructed primarily based on the team’s experience of a previous study on the challenge to undergo a two-step lip-nose reconstruction with an Abbé-flap [12]. The custom-made questionnaire had 13 questions in total. Ten questions had pre-set response options. For three of them, the alternatives were ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Six questions had four graded response options related to the impact of the treatment. One question related to speech had three answer alternatives: better, worse, or unchanged. Another three questions allowed the subjects to express their view of the treatment in free text. For the purpose of reporting our results to the English-speaking readership, the questionnaire was translated from Swedish to English and then back-translated into Swedish. The back-translated Swedish version was then compared to the original version and a few adjustments were accordingly made. Based on this widely accepted linguistic validation method the questionnaire is shown in Figure 2.
Validation of the Turkish version of the self-evaluation of negative symptoms scale (SNS)
Published in International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice, 2022
Irmak Polat, Ezgi Ince Guliyev, Sibel Elmas, Sufiya Karakaş, Ömer Aydemir, Alp Üçok
The Turkish version of the SNS is based on a translation process including forward translation, back translation, and reconciliation of back-translation with the SNS developers. First, the scale was translated into the target language (Turkish) from its original language (French) by a bilingual translator. Then, this first version of the translation was evaluated in terms of linguistic and cultural validity, and a pre-final version was agreed upon by the researchers. The pre-final version of the scale was back-translated from the target language (Turkish) to the original language (French) by another bilingual translator who was not from the field and blinded to the aims and content of the study. The back-translated version was assessed by the developer of the original scale (Dr. Sonia Dollfus), who confirmed the scale’s translation and provided a certificate of linguistic validation. As a final step, the scale was introduced to the patients with schizophrenia and their caregivers, and their feedback was sought. No changes have been made in this step. All researchers approved the final version of the scale to be used in the reliability and validity analyses.
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Ukrainian version of the ABILHAND-Kids questionnaire
Published in Disability and Rehabilitation, 2021
Marko B. Hasiuk, Carlyne Arnould, Anna D. Kushnir, Oles A. Matiushenko, Oleh O. Kachmar
Cross-cultural validation refers to whether the measures originally generated by a questionnaire in a single culture are applicable, meaningful, and thus equivalent in another culture [40]. Similar to the graduations of a metric ruler, ABILHAND-Kids items should have the same difficulty for all nationalities or cultures, regardless of the language version being used. A linguistic validation is not sufficient to prove cross-cultural validity as item difficulties may vary across countries due to translation errors or cultural differences. Cross-cultural validity is only obtained by verifying the absence of differential item functioning between cultural groups. To investigate the differential item functioning across countries (Ukraine vs. Belgium), Ukrainian data were pooled with the original data of 113 Belgian children with CP [3]. Differential item functioning across countries was measured by computing a two-way analysis of variance on the standardized residuals of 4 class intervals of increasing ability levels; the first factor was the child’s country (Ukraine vs. Belgium) and the second factor was the class interval. Items presenting a significant main effect for the first factor indicate a significant differential item functioning or, in other words, that their difficulty varies across countries. Due to the number of statistical tests undertaken, Bonferroni corrections were applied to p values of differential item functioning statistics (i.e., p = 0.05/number of items = 0.0024) [13].