↓ Skip to main content

Development of the US English version of the phenylketonuria – quality of life (PKU-QOL) questionnaire

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
Title
Development of the US English version of the phenylketonuria – quality of life (PKU-QOL) questionnaire
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0620-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elaina Jurecki, Amy Cunningham, Vanessa Birardi, Grégory Gagol, Catherine Acquadro

Abstract

Phenylketonuria (PKU) is a rare genetic disorder caused by a defect in the metabolism of phenylalanine (PHE) resulting in elevated blood and brain PHE levels, and leading to cognitive, emotional, and psychosocial problems. The phenylketonuria - quality of life (PKU-QOL) questionnaire was the first self-administered disease-specific instrument developed to assess the impact of PKU and its treatment on the health-related quality of life (HRQL) of patients and their caregivers. Available in four versions (child, adolescent, adult and parent), the PKU-QOL was simultaneously developed and validated in seven countries [i.e., France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain, Turkey and the United Kingdom (UK)]. The objectives of our study were to develop and linguistically validate the PKU-QOL questionnaire for use in the United States (US). The UK versions served as a basis for the development of the US English PKU-QOL questionnaire. The linguistic validation process consisted of 4 steps: 1) adaptation of the UK versions into US English by a translator native of US English and living in the US; 2) a clinician review; 3) cognitive interviews with patients and caregivers to test the appropriateness, understandability and clarity of the US translations; and 4) two proof-readings. The adaptation from UK to US English revealed the usual syntactic and idiomatic differences between the two languages, such as differences in: 1) Spelling, e.g., "dietician" (UK) vs. "dietitian" (US), or "mum" (UK) vs. "mom" (US); 2) Syntax or punctuation; and 3) Words/expressions use, e.g., "holidays" (UK) vs. "vacation" (US), or "biscuits" (UK) vs. "crackers" (US). The major issue was cultural, and consisted of using a different terminology to describe PKU treatment throughout the questionnaires. The clinician, with the patients and the caregivers, during the interviews suggested to replace "supplement and amino-acid mixture" or "supplements" with "medical formula." This wording was later changed to "medical food" to be consistent with the terminology used in current US published guidelines. The translation of the UK English PKU-QOL questionnaire into US English did not raise critical semantic and cultural issues. The PKU-QOL will be valuable for US healthcare providers in individualizing treatment and managing patients with PKU.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 124 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 15%
Student > Master 17 14%
Other 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 37 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Psychology 15 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 22 18%
Unknown 44 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,082,390
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#709
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,265
of 307,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#9
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 307,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.