Literature DB >> 19933717

Satisfactory cross-cultural validity of the ACTG symptom distress module in HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive patients.

Antoine Regnault1, Shalaka Marfatia, Michael Louie, Isabelle Mear, Juliette Meunier, Muriel Viala-Danten.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multinational clinical trials commonly include different language versions of patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments without considering the question of their cross-cultural validity. The inclusion of a PRO instrument, the Adult AIDS Clinical Trial Group Symptom Distress Module (SDM), in an multinational clinical trial in HIV-1 antiretroviral-naive patients offered an opportunity to explore the methods to assess cross-cultural validity of PRO instruments in the context of clinical trials.
PURPOSE: To assess the cross-cultural validity of the SDM across seven cultural groups in the setting of a multinational HIV clinical trial.
METHODS: Twenty-five language versions of the SDM were included in a Phase IIb/III trial comparing maraviroc with efavirenz (each in combination with zidovudine/ lamivudine) conducted in 12 countries to assess symptoms perceived by HIV-1-infected antiretroviral-naive patients. Differential item functioning (DIF) detection and the STATIS method were combined in a pragmatic approach to assess the cross-cultural validity of the SDM using pre-antiretroviral treatment data from 759 patients.
RESULTS: Statistically significant DIF between cultural groups was observed for four items: fatigue; fevers; anxiety; and headache. However, examination of these items by linguists did not lead to meaningful explanations for the statistical differences. With the STATIS approach, the Bantu and European Germanic groups were the furthest from the Occidental English group. LIMITATIONS: The assessment of cross-cultural validity had to be performed on some very small samples and on data aggregated by cultural groups, which suggests the need for a cautious interpretation of the results.
CONCLUSIONS: Given the heterogeneity of cultures considered, the absence of meaningful explanations for statistically significant differences between cultural groups supports the cross-cultural validity of the SDM versions included in this trial. Thus, this study demonstrated that it is feasible to conduct assessment of crosscultural validity of PRO instruments using data collected in the setting of multinational clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19933717     DOI: 10.1177/1740774509352515

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Trials        ISSN: 1740-7745            Impact factor:   2.486


  4 in total

1.  Pooling of cross-cultural PRO data in multinational clinical trials: how much can poor measurement affect statistical power?

Authors:  Antoine Regnault; Jean-François Hamel; Donald L Patrick
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-09-05       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Using quantitative methods within the Universalist model framework to explore the cross-cultural equivalence of patient-reported outcome instruments.

Authors:  Antoine Regnault; Michael Herdman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-06-04       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Real World Patient-reported Outcomes in HIV-infected Adults Switching to EVIPLERA®, Because of a Previous Intolerance to cART. PRO-STR Study.

Authors:  D Podzamczer; N Rozas; P Domingo; C Miralles; E Van den Eynde; A Romero; E Deig; H Knobel; J Pasquau; A Antela; B Clotet; P Geijo; E Rodríguez de Castro; M A Casado; A Muñoz; A Casado
Journal:  Curr HIV Res       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 1.581

Review 4.  Patient reported outcome instruments used in clinical trials of HIV-infected adults on NNRTI-based therapy: a 10-year review.

Authors:  Kit N Simpson; Kristin A Hanson; Gale Harding; Seema Haider; Margaret Tawadrous; Alexandra Khachatryan; Chris L Pashos; Albert W Wu
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 3.186

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.