PURPOSE: To assess the procedures of translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and measurement properties of breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaires. METHODS: Searches were conducted in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SciELO using the keywords: "Questionnaires," "Quality of life," and "Breast cancer." The studies were analyzed in terms of methodological quality according to the guidelines for the procedure of cross-cultural adaptation and the quality criteria for measurement properties of questionnaires. RESULTS: We found 24 eligible studies. Most of the articles assessed the translation and measurement properties of the instrument EORTC QLQ-BR23. Description about translation and cross-cultural adaptation was incomplete in 11 studies. Translation and back translation were the most tested phases, and synthesis of the translation was the most omitted phase in the articles. Information on assessing measurement properties was provided incompletely in 23 articles. Internal consistency was the most tested property in all of the eligible articles, but none of them provided information on agreement. Construct validity was adequately tested in only three studies that used the FACT-B and QLQ-BR23. Eight articles provided information on reliability; however, only four found positive classification. Responsiveness was tested in four articles, and ceiling and floor effects were tested in only three articles. None of the instruments showed fully adequate quality. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence on cross-cultural adaptations and measurement properties; therefore, it is recommended that caution be exercised when using breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaires that have been translated, adapted, and tested.
PURPOSE: To assess the procedures of translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and measurement properties of breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaires. METHODS: Searches were conducted in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SciELO using the keywords: "Questionnaires," "Quality of life," and "Breast cancer." The studies were analyzed in terms of methodological quality according to the guidelines for the procedure of cross-cultural adaptation and the quality criteria for measurement properties of questionnaires. RESULTS: We found 24 eligible studies. Most of the articles assessed the translation and measurement properties of the instrument EORTC QLQ-BR23. Description about translation and cross-cultural adaptation was incomplete in 11 studies. Translation and back translation were the most tested phases, and synthesis of the translation was the most omitted phase in the articles. Information on assessing measurement properties was provided incompletely in 23 articles. Internal consistency was the most tested property in all of the eligible articles, but none of them provided information on agreement. Construct validity was adequately tested in only three studies that used the FACT-B and QLQ-BR23. Eight articles provided information on reliability; however, only four found positive classification. Responsiveness was tested in four articles, and ceiling and floor effects were tested in only three articles. None of the instruments showed fully adequate quality. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence on cross-cultural adaptations and measurement properties; therefore, it is recommended that caution be exercised when using breast cancer-specific quality-of-life questionnaires that have been translated, adapted, and tested.
Authors: Luciola da Cunha Menezes Costa; Christopher G Maher; James H McAuley; Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Joerg Heil; Simone Holl; Michael Golatta; Geraldine Rauch; Joachim Rom; Frederik Marmé; Gerhard Gebauer; Christof Sohn Journal: Breast Date: 2010-06-03 Impact factor: 4.380
Authors: V Parmar; R A Badwe; R Hawaldar; S Rayabhattanavar; A Varghese; R Sharma; I Mittra Journal: Natl Med J India Date: 2005 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 0.537
Authors: M J Brady; D F Cella; F Mo; A E Bonomi; D S Tulsky; S R Lloyd; S Deasy; M Cobleigh; G Shiomoto Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Barbara A Springer; Ellen Levy; Charles McGarvey; Lucinda A Pfalzer; Nicole L Stout; Lynn H Gerber; Peter W Soballe; Jerome Danoff Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Michael J Del Bel; Laryssa G Kemp; Céline I Girard; Julie Rossignol; Sébastien F Goulet; Jean-François Bourgon; Sasha Carsen; Daniel L Benoit Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 1.037