A Systematic Review and Appraisal of the Cross-Cultural Validity of Functional Status Assessments Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Authors:
Kaleb Michaud
Kaleb Michaud
University of Kansas School of Medicine
United States
Jinoos Yazdany
Jinoos Yazdany
University of California
Aileen M Davis
Aileen M Davis
University of Toronto
Canada
Linda Ehrlich-Jones
Linda Ehrlich-Jones
Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago
United States

Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2019 Apr 12. Epub 2019 Apr 12.

Department of Medicine & Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary; Arthritis Research Canada, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

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 the more recent Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Functional Status Assessment Measures (FSAMs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods: Four electronic medical databases were searched from inception until April 4 , 2018 according 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 papers 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-DI, 8 other HAQ derivatives, and 2 PROMIS measures, representing 22 languages. Of the 39 papers 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. This needs to be considered when using these measures for multinational clinical trials and for day-to-day use in clinical practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acr.23904DOI Listing
April 2019
7 Reads

Article Mentions


Provided by Crossref Event Data
twitter
Twitter:
April 15, 2019, 11:02 am EST
twitter
Twitter:
April 15, 2019, 11:00 am EST

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cross-cultural validity
28
excellent good
8
search strategy
8
rheumatoid arthritis
8
haq derivatives
8
promis measures
8
adaptation cross-cultural
8
functional status
8
good fair
8
review appraisal
8
cross-cultural
8
appraisal cross-cultural
8
systematic review
8
validity
7
measures
5
validity translated
4
representing languages
4
examined cross-cultural
4
item functioning
4
languages papers
4

Similar Publications