Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2020
Validity and reliability of the MD Anderson dysphagia inventory in English and Chinese in head and neck cancer patients.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Yee Kaisin, Wong Seng Mun, Teo Irene, Loy Jamie, Roche Elizabeth, Tan Yee Pin, Tan Hiang Khoon, Tan Ngian Chye, Iyer N Gopalakrishna
Аннотация
AIMS: Patient-reported outcome measures are important in assessing the impact of dysphagia on quality of life. Our aim was to adapt and examine the cultural validity and reliability of a swallowing-related quality of life measure, the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI), in English and Chinese, with head and neck cancer patients.
METHODS: We adapted the MDADI to Chinese through formal forward-backward translation. Sixty-six head and neck cancer survivors completed the MDADI, Swallowing Quality of Life (SWAL-QOL) questionnaire and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in English or Chinese. Swallowing status was scored on the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS). Seventy-four percent (n = 49) of participants completed a repeat administration of the MDADI for test-retest reliability analysis.
RESULTS: The MDADI showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α , 0.82 ≤ α ≤ 0.94), and test-retest reliability in both English (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.81) and Chinese (ICC = 0.72). Criterion validity was established through moderate to strong correlations with relevant SWAL-QOL domains. Convergent validity was determined by significant correlations to the HADS and FOIS. Divergent validity was determined by nonsignificant association to the SWAL-QOL Sleep domain. The MDADI also presented as hypothesised to most known-group theoretical constructs.
CONCLUSIONS: The MDADI showed good psychometric properties in English and Chinese. This avails a reliable and psychometrically valid MDADI for Chinese speakers.
METHODS: We adapted the MDADI to Chinese through formal forward-backward translation. Sixty-six head and neck cancer survivors completed the MDADI, Swallowing Quality of Life (SWAL-QOL) questionnaire and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in English or Chinese. Swallowing status was scored on the Functional Oral Intake Scale (FOIS). Seventy-four percent (n = 49) of participants completed a repeat administration of the MDADI for test-retest reliability analysis.
RESULTS: The MDADI showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's α , 0.82 ≤ α ≤ 0.94), and test-retest reliability in both English (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC = 0.81) and Chinese (ICC = 0.72). Criterion validity was established through moderate to strong correlations with relevant SWAL-QOL domains. Convergent validity was determined by significant correlations to the HADS and FOIS. Divergent validity was determined by nonsignificant association to the SWAL-QOL Sleep domain. The MDADI also presented as hypothesised to most known-group theoretical constructs.
CONCLUSIONS: The MDADI showed good psychometric properties in English and Chinese. This avails a reliable and psychometrically valid MDADI for Chinese speakers.