Sinaa Alaqeel1, Almaha Alfakhri2, Zakiyah Alkherb2, Nouf Almeshal2. 1. Clinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. salageel@ksu.edu.sa. 2. Clinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This research aimed, first, to identify, summarize, and synthesize the studies reporting the development, translation, and/or psychometric evaluation of PROMs in Arabic-speaking populations and, second, to evaluate the psychometric properties and the translation process of a sample 26 PROMs. METHODS: In 2019, PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS were searched for studies reporting the development, translation, or cross-cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures in Arabic-speaking populations, and those including the assessment of one or more psychometric properties as PROMs (including validity, reliability, responsiveness, interpretability) in our target populations were included. The review protocol registration number is CRD42018088991. RESULTS: The search strategy outlined above yielded a total of 3179 titles in the three databases. Of these, 174 English language studies met the inclusion criteria. One hundred thirty-six PROMs were identified. The methodological quality and translation process of PROMs reported by at least two studies (26 PROM instruments, 63 studies) were examined. Internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity were the most frequently reported psychometric properties. Structural validity, cross-cultural validity, responsiveness, and measurement error were largely unreported. The process of developing at least two independent forward translations and back translation of the instrument into the source language were reported by 32 and 43 studies, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further investigation of measurement properties of Arabic PROMs measures before routine use can be recommended in clinical practice.
PURPOSE: This research aimed, first, to identify, summarize, and synthesize the studies reporting the development, translation, and/or psychometric evaluation of PROMs in Arabic-speaking populations and, second, to evaluate the psychometric properties and the translation process of a sample 26 PROMs. METHODS: In 2019, PubMed, Web of Science, and SCOPUS were searched for studies reporting the development, translation, or cross-cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures in Arabic-speaking populations, and those including the assessment of one or more psychometric properties as PROMs (including validity, reliability, responsiveness, interpretability) in our target populations were included. The review protocol registration number is CRD42018088991. RESULTS: The search strategy outlined above yielded a total of 3179 titles in the three databases. Of these, 174 English language studies met the inclusion criteria. One hundred thirty-six PROMs were identified. The methodological quality and translation process of PROMs reported by at least two studies (26 PROM instruments, 63 studies) were examined. Internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity were the most frequently reported psychometric properties. Structural validity, cross-cultural validity, responsiveness, and measurement error were largely unreported. The process of developing at least two independent forward translations and back translation of the instrument into the source language were reported by 32 and 43 studies, respectively. CONCLUSION: There is a need for further investigation of measurement properties of Arabic PROMs measures before routine use can be recommended in clinical practice.
Authors: C B Terwee; C A C Prinsen; A Chiarotto; M J Westerman; D L Patrick; J Alonso; L M Bouter; H C W de Vet; L B Mokkink Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2018-03-17 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Daniel S J Costa; Rebecca Mercieca-Bebber; Claudia Rutherford; Margaret-Ann Tait; Madeleine T King Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: L B Mokkink; H C W de Vet; C A C Prinsen; D L Patrick; J Alonso; L M Bouter; C B Terwee Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-12-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: J A Palacio-Vieira; E Villalonga-Olives; J M Valderas; M Espallargues; M Herdman; S Berra; J Alonso; L Rajmil Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2008-10-18 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Bradley C Johnston; Donald L Patrick; Kristian Thorlund; Jason W Busse; Bruno R da Costa; Holger J Schünemann; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2013-12-21 Impact factor: 3.186