Author
Listed:
- Anne Kjaergaard Danielsen
- Hans-Christian Pommergaard
- Jakob Burcharth
- Eva Angenete
- Jacob Rosenberg
Abstract
Introduction: There is growing awareness of the need to explore patient reported outcomes in clinical trials. In the Scandinavian Surgical Outcomes Research Group we are conducting several clinical trials in cooperation between Danish and Swedish surgical researchers, and we use questionnaires aimed at patients from both countries. In relation to this and similar international cooperation, the validity and reliability of translated questionnaires are central aspects. Main Objectives: The purpose of this study was to explore which methodological measures were used in studies reporting translation of questionnaires. Furthermore, we wanted to make some methodological suggestions for clinical researchers who are faced with having to translate a questionnaire. Material and Methods: We designed a research study based on a survey of the literature and extracted data from published studies reporting the methodological process when translating questionnaires on health related quality of life for different diseases. Results: We retrieved 187 studies and out of theses we included 52 studies. The psychometric properties of the translated versions were validated using different tests. The focus was on internal validity (96%), reliability (67%) criterion validity (81%), and construct validity (62%). For internal validity Cronbach's alpha was used in 94% of the studies. Conclusions: This study shows that there seems to be a consensus regarding the translation process (especially for internal validity) although most researchers did not use a translation guide. Moreover, we recommended that clinical researchers should consider three steps covering the process of translation, the qualitative validation as well as the quantitative validation.
Suggested Citation
Anne Kjaergaard Danielsen & Hans-Christian Pommergaard & Jakob Burcharth & Eva Angenete & Jacob Rosenberg, 2015.
"Translation of Questionnaires Measuring Health Related Quality of Life Is Not Standardized: A Literature Based Research Study,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-10, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0127050
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127050
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0127050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.