Dutch–Flemish translation and validation of the gastrointestinal symptom scales from the patient‑reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS)®
-
Published:2023-11-30
Issue:1
Volume:7
Page:
-
ISSN:2509-8020
-
Container-title:Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:J Patient Rep Outcomes
Author:
van der Ende-van Loon MirjamORCID, Korteling Dorinde, Willekens Hilde, Schilders Monique, Curvers Wouter, Bisschops Raf, Schoon Erik, Terwee Caroline
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
To translate the eight PROMIS® GastrointestinaI Symptom Scales into Dutch–Flemish and to evaluate their psychometric properties.
Methods
This study consisted of two parts: (1) translation according to the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation methodology and (2) evaluation of psychometric properties: structural validity, using confirmatory factor analysis; and construct validity using hypothesis testing.
Results
In the first part of the study, in 19 out of the 77 items (24.7%) translation was challenging. After discussion between the translators, consensus could be achieved. In the cognitive debriefing interview phase, ten minor changes in the wording of items were made. A universal Dutch–Flemish translation for all 77 items was obtained. In de second part of the study a good fit was found for three DF-PROMIS GI Scales: Bowel Incontinence, Gas and Bloating, and Belly Pain. Four scales (Reflux, Disrupted Swallowing, Diarrhea, and Constipation) did not show sufficient fit and fit for the Nausea and Vomiting scale could not be assessed because of skewed responses. Construct validity was considered sufficient for six out of eight DF-PROMIS GI Scales. Less than 75% of hypothesis for de Constipation and Disrupted Swallowing scales could be confirmed.
Conclusion
The PROMIS GI Symptom Scales were successfully translated into DutchFlemish. The findings suggest a sufficient structural validity for the PROMIS GI Scales. Bowel Incontinence, Gas and Bloating and Belly Pain. Construct validity was sufficient for the Scales Gas and Bloating, Incontinence, Nausea and Vomiting, Reflux, Belly Pain, and Diarrhea.
Funder
Catharina Research Fund
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health Information Management,Health Informatics
Reference23 articles.
1. Sperber AD, Bangdiwala SI, Drossman DA, Ghoshal UC, Simren M, Tack J, Whitehead WE, Dumitrascu DL, Fang X, Fukudo S, Kellow J, Okeke E, Quigley EMM, Schmulson M, Whorwell P, Archampong T, Adibi P, Andresen V, Benninga MA, Bonaz B, Bor S, Fernandez LB, Choi SC, Corazziari ES, Francisconi C, Hani A, Lazebnik L, Lee YY, Mulak A, Rahman MM, Santos J, Setshedi M, Syam AF, Vanner S, Wong RK, Lopez-Colombo A, Costa V, Dickman R, Kanazawa M, Keshteli AH, Khatun R, Maleki I, Poitras P, Pratap N, Stefanyuk O, Thomson S, Zeevenhooven J, Palsson OS (2021) Worldwide prevalence and burden of functional gastrointestinal disorders, results of Rome foundation global study. Gastroenterology 160(1):99–1143 2. Khanna P, Agarwal N, Khanna D et al (2014) Development of an online library of patient reported outcome measures in gastroenterology: the GI-PRO database. Am J Gastroenterol 109:234–248 3. Spiegel BM, Hays RD, Bolus R, Melmed GY, Chang L, Whitman C, Khanna PP, Paz SH, Hays T, Reise S, Khanna D (2014) Development of the NIH patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) gastrointestinal symptom scales. Am J Gastroenterol 109(11):1804–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/ajg.2014.237. Epub 2014 Sep 9. Erratum in: Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Apr;110(4):608. PMID: 25199473; PMCID: PMC4285435 4. Khanna D, Hays RD, Shreiner AB, Melmed GY, Chang L, Khanna PP, Bolus R, Whitman C, Paz SH, Hays T, Reise SP, Spiegel B (2017) Responsiveness to change and minimally important differences of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system gastrointestinal symptoms scales. Dig Dis Sci 62(5):1186–1192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-017-4499-9 5. Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ (2005) A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof 28(2):212–232
|
|