Abstract
Abstract
Background
To develop an open-access database of Arabic health measures intended for use by researchers and healthcare providers, along with a bibliometric analysis of the measures included in the database.
Methods
A search was conducted up to 31 December 2021 in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SAGE, Springer and Elsevier for published articles or abstracts with keywords “Arabic” AND “translation”, “adaptation” OR “validation”. Information on the measure and the methodology used in the study was then entered into a database. An open-access platform was developed to allow users to search for measures according to their needs. A bibliometric analysis of the articles and measures was then conducted.
Results
A total of 894 publications met the inclusion criteria. The articles discussed 716 measures that were developed using participants from at least 38 countries. The number of measures for adults was five times that for children. Mental health was the most frequent construct assessed (11.5%), followed by “function/disability” measures (10.6%). The majority of measures (54%) required 5 minutes or less to complete. Approximately 17% of the tools were available directly from the article. Saudi Arabia and Lebanon had the greatest number of publications, with 217 (23%) and 114 (12%), respectively. The majority of the publications included reporting of the validation and reliability of the instruments (64% and 56%, respectively).
Conclusions
There is a paucity of research on the quantity and quality of Arabic health measures. Similar to previous reviews, we found the number of publications on Arabic measures to be limited in comparison to those in English; however, it is encouraging that the number of publications appears to have increased steadily over the past decade. While we found the majority of publications reported on psychometric testing, we are unable to comment on the quality of the methodology used, and further investigation into this area is recommended. As the Arabic Health Measures database will facilitate the search for health instruments that have published data on their development, this will increase their visibility and use in research and clinical settings.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference19 articles.
1. Roberts WD, Stone PW. How to choose and evaluate a research instrument. Appl Nurs Res. 2003;16(1):70–2.
2. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.
3. Behling O, Law KS. Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: problems and solutions, vol. 133. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2000.
4. Harkness JA, van de Vijver FJ, Mohler PP, Wiley J. Cross-cultural survey methods, vol. 325. NJ: Wiley-Interscience Hoboken; 2003.
5. Pan Y, de La Puente M. Census Bureau guideline for the translation of data collection instruments and supporting materials: documentation on how the guideline was developed. Survey Methodol. 2005;6. https://www.census.gov/library/working-papers/2005/adrm/rsm2005-06.html.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献