The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2023
Finnish Translation and Linguistic Validation of the CLEFT-Q Questionnaire.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Westerlund Mikael, Heliövaara Arja, Leikola Junnu, Homsy Pauliina
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) can have long-lasting effects on the appearance, function, and psychosocial wellbeing of patients. The CLEFT-Q questionnaire is a patient-reported outcomes instrument specifically designed to assess the health-related quality of life of patients with CL/P. The aim of this study was to produce and linguistically validate a Finnish version of the CLEFT-Q questionnaire.
DESIGN: The CLEFT-Q questionnaire was translated into Finnish following guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Pilot testing with cognitive debriefing interviews was conducted on patients of the target age range of the questionnaire, 8-29, and with various cleft types.
RESULTS: The CLEFT-Q questionnaire translated readily into Finnish. A review of the backward translation led to two words being changed. Thirteen patients - ten females and three males - with a median age of 14 years, participated in the cognitive debriefing interviews. The interviews led to further nine word changes. The pilot study data suggested that the performance of the Finnish version of the instrument is in line with the original CLEFT-Q questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: The Finnish version of CLEFT-Q produced here is linguistically valid and ready for use in the evaluation of the health-related quality of life of patients with CL/P. However, future work is needed to further assess the validity and the reliability of the CLEFT-Q in the Finnish patient population.
DESIGN: The CLEFT-Q questionnaire was translated into Finnish following guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. Pilot testing with cognitive debriefing interviews was conducted on patients of the target age range of the questionnaire, 8-29, and with various cleft types.
RESULTS: The CLEFT-Q questionnaire translated readily into Finnish. A review of the backward translation led to two words being changed. Thirteen patients - ten females and three males - with a median age of 14 years, participated in the cognitive debriefing interviews. The interviews led to further nine word changes. The pilot study data suggested that the performance of the Finnish version of the instrument is in line with the original CLEFT-Q questionnaire.
CONCLUSIONS: The Finnish version of CLEFT-Q produced here is linguistically valid and ready for use in the evaluation of the health-related quality of life of patients with CL/P. However, future work is needed to further assess the validity and the reliability of the CLEFT-Q in the Finnish patient population.