Literature DB >> 28154441

Lucie Brosseau1, Chantal Laroche2, Paulette Guitard3, Judy King1, Stéphane Poitras1, Lynn Casimiro4, Julie Alexandra Barette5, Dominique Cardinal6, Sabrina Cavallo7, Lucie Laferrière8, Rose Martini1, Nicholas Champoux1, Jennifer Taverne1, Chanyque Paquette1, Sébastien Tremblay1, Ann Sutton2, Roseline Galipeau9, Jocelyne Tourigny10, Karine Toupin-April11, Laurianne Loew7, Catrine Demers7, Katrine Sauvé-Schenk7, Nicole Paquet1, Jacinthe Savard3, Josée Lagacé2, Denyse Pharand10, Véronique Vaillancourt2.   

Abstract

Objectives: The primary objective was to produce a French-Canadian translation of AMSTAR (a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews) and to examine the validity of the translation's contents. The secondary and tertiary objectives were to assess the inter-rater reliability and factorial construct validity of this French-Canadian version of AMSTAR.
Methods: A modified approach to Vallerand's methodology (1989) for cross-cultural validation was used.1 First, a parallel back-translation of AMSTAR2 was performed, by both professionals and future professionals. Next, a first committee of experts (P1) examined the translations to create a first draft of the French-Canadian version of the AMSTAR tool. This draft was then evaluated and modified by a second committee of experts (P2). Following that, 18 future professionals (master's students in physiotherapy) rated this second draft of the instrument for clarity using a seven-point scale (1: very clear; 7: very ambiguous). Lastly, the principal co-investigators then reviewed the problematic elements and proposed final changes. Four independent raters used this French-Canadian version of AMSTAR to assess 20 systematic reviews that were published in French after the year 2000. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and kappa coefficient were calculated to measure the tool's inter-rater reliability. A Cronbach's alpha coefficient was also calculated to measure internal consistency. In addition, factor analysis was used to evaluate construct validity in order to determine the number of dimensions.
Results: The statements on the final version of the AMSTAR tool received an average ambiguity rating of between 1.0 and 1.4. No statement received an average rating below 1.4, which indicates a high level of clarity. Inter-rater reliability (n=4) for the instrument's total score was moderate, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29, 0.97). Inter-rater reliability for 82% of the individual items was good, according to the kappa values obtained. Internal consistency was excellent, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83, 0.99). The French-Canadian version of AMSTAR is a unidimensional tool, as confirmed by factor analysis and community values greater than 0.30.
Conclusion: A valid French-Canadian version of AMSTAR was created using this rigorous five-step process. This version is unidimensional, with moderate inter-rater reliability for the elements overall, and with excellent internal consistency. This tool could be valuable to French-Canadian professionals and researchers, and could also be of interest to the international Francophone community.

Entities:  

Keywords:  research methodology; systematic reviews, as topic; translation, cross-cultural validity

Year:  2017        PMID: 28154441      PMCID: PMC5280047          DOI: 10.3138/ptc.2015-80F

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Physiother Can        ISSN: 0300-0508            Impact factor:   1.037


  15 in total

1.  Translation of the Leisure Satisfaction Scale into French: a validation study.

Authors:  Mary Lysyk; G Ted Brown; Erika Rodrigues; Julie McNally; Kim Loo
Journal:  Occup Ther Int       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 1.448

2.  [Not Available].

Authors:  Frédéric René; Lynn Casimiro; Manon Tremblay; Lucie Brosseau; Annabelle Lefebvre; Martine Beaudouin; Véronik Belliveau; Louis-Philippe Bergeron
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 1.037

3.  [Not Available].

Authors:  Frédéric René; Lynn Casimiro; Manon Tremblay; Lucie Brosseau; Phanny Chea; Liliane Létourneau; Megan Silva; Victoria Stockwell; Louis-Philippe Bergeron
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 1.037

Review 4.  A systematic evaluation of the quality of meta-analyses in endodontics.

Authors:  Siriwan Suebnukarn; Sureeporn Ngamboonsirisingh; Angwara Rattanabanlang
Journal:  J Endod       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 4.171

5.  [Not Available].

Authors:  Lucie Brosseau; Chantal Laroche; Anne Sutton; Paulette Guitard; Judy King; Stéphane Poitras; Lynn Casimiro; Manon Tremblay; Dominique Cardinal; Sabrina Cavallo; Lucie Laferrière; Isabelle Grisé; Lisa Marshall; Jacky R Smith; Josée Lagacé; Denyse Pharand; Roseline Galipeau; Karine Toupin-April; Laurianne Loew; Catrine Demers; Katrine Sauvé-Schenk; Nicole Paquet; Jacinthe Savard; Jocelyne Tourigny; Véronique Vaillancourt
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.037

6.  The test-retest reliability of a revised version of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS).

Authors:  A K McFadyen; V S Webster; W M Maclaren
Journal:  J Interprof Care       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.338

7.  Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature.

Authors:  Joel J Gagnier; Patrick J Kellam
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-06-05       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Systematic reviews explained: AMSTAR-how to tell the good from the bad and the ugly.

Authors:  Mohammad O Sharif; Fyeza N Janjua-Sharif; Fyeza N Janjua Sharif; Hesham Ali; Farooq Ahmed
Journal:  Oral Health Dent Manag       Date:  2013-03

9.  From Systematic Reviews to Clinical Recommendations for Evidence-Based Health Care: Validation of Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) for Grading of Clinical Relevance.

Authors:  Jason Kung; Francesco Chiappelli; Olivia O Cajulis; Raisa Avezova; George Kossan; Laura Chew; Carl A Maida
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2010-07-16

10.  Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses.

Authors:  Nikola Panic; Emanuele Leoncini; Giulio de Belvis; Walter Ricciardi; Stefania Boccia
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  2 in total

1. 

Authors:  Judy King; Lucie Brosseau; Paulette Guitard; Chantal Laroche; Julie Alexandra Barette; Dominique Cardinal; Sabrina Cavallo; Lucie Laferrière; Karine Toupin-April; Marie-Ève Bérubé; Jennifer O'Neil; Jessane Castro; Cendy Kidjo; Sandy Fakhry; Ann Sutton; Roseline Galipeau; Jocelyne Tourigny; Josée Lagacé; Catrine Demers; Nicole Paquet; Denyse Pharand; Laurianne Loew; Véronique Vaillancourt; Katrine Sauvé-Schenk
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 1.037

2. 

Authors:  Heather Flowers; Paulette Guitard; Judy King; Elizabeth Fitzpatrick; Daniel Bérubé; Julie Alexandra Barette; Dominique Cardinal; Sabrina Cavallo; Jennifer O'Neil; Marylène Charette; Laurence Côté; Nalia Cecilia Gurgel-Juarez; Karine Toupin-April; Shirin M Shallwani; Michelle Dorion; Prinon Rahman; Maude Potvin-Gilbert; Vanessa Bartolini; Krystina B Lewis; Rose Martini; Josée Lagacé; Roseline Galipeau; Marie-Christine Ranger; Fauve Duquette-Laplante; Marie-France Perrier; Jacinthe Savard; Nicole Paquet; Jocelyne Tourigny; Marie-Eve Bérubé; Hussein Ba Haroon; Patrick Duong; Jacynthe Bigras; Julie Capistran; Laurianne Loew
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 1.037

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.