|
" Systematic Review and Appraisal of the Cross-Cultural Validity of Functional Status Assessment Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis. "
Kulhawy-Wibe, Stephanie C; Zell, JoAnn; Michaud, Kaleb; Yazdany, Jinoos; Davis, Aileen M; Ehrlich-Jones, Linda; Thorne, J Carter; Everix, Donna; Cappelli, Laura C; Suter, Lisa G; Limanni, Alex; Barber, Claire EH
| Document Type
|
:
|
AL
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
907742
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
LA0p67x17f
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
Systematic Review and Appraisal of the Cross-Cultural Validity of Functional Status Assessment Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis. [Article]\ Kulhawy-Wibe, Stephanie C; Zell, JoAnn; Michaud, Kaleb; Yazdany, Jinoos; Davis, Aileen M; Ehrlich-Jones, Linda; Thorne, J Carter; Everix, Donna; Cappelli, Laura C; Suter, Lisa G; Limanni, Alex; Barber, Claire EH
|
| Date
|
:
|
2020
|
| Title of Periodical
|
:
|
UCSF
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
OBJECTIVE:We conducted a systematic review and appraisal of the cross-cultural adaptation and cross-cultural validity of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and its derivatives, and of the more recent Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) functional status assessment measures (FSAMs) in rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS:Four electronic medical databases were searched from inception until April 4, 2018 according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group search strategy. Included studies were evaluated using the COSMIN tool for cross-cultural validity and were scored as excellent, good, fair, or poor. RESULTS:Of 58 articles identified by our search strategy and 3 by manual search, 39 were included: 29 described the translation, cultural adaptation, or cross-cultural validity of the HAQ disability index, 8 other HAQ derivatives, and 2 PROMIS measures, representing 22 languages. Of the 39 articles reviewed, 3 examined the cross-cultural validity of translated versions. These studies were rated as follows: 2 as excellent, 3 good, 13 fair, and 21 poor. Two studies examining cross-cultural validity noted differential item functioning (DIF) between Dutch and US populations for the HAQ-II and PROMIS measures, and a third study found DIF between Turkish and UK populations on the HAQ, indicating cultural differences in questionnaire response. CONCLUSION:This review highlights a paucity of data on the cross-cultural validity of FSAMs and the mostly poor- or fair-quality methods by which they were translated and adapted, which needs to be considered when using these measures for multinational clinical trials and for day-to-day use in clinical practice.
|
| |