| Title |
Cross-cultural adaptation and measurement properties of generic and cancer-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use with cancer patients in Brazil: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Quality of Life Research, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11136-017-1703-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carlos Augusto Albach, Richard Wagland, Katherine J. Hunt |
| Abstract |
This systematic review (1) identifies the current generic and cancer-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that have been cross-culturally adapted to Brazilian Portuguese and applied to cancer patients and (2) critically evaluates their cross-cultural adaptation (CCA) and measurement properties. Seven databases were searched for articles regarding the translation and evaluation of measurement properties of generic and cancer-related PROMs cross-culturally adapted to Brazilian Portuguese that are applied in adult (≥18 years old) cancer patients. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. The bibliographic search retrieved 1674 hits, of which seven studies analysing eight instruments were included in this review. Data on the interpretability of scores were poorly reported. Overall, the quality of the CCA process was inconsistent throughout the studies. None of the included studies performed a cross-cultural validation. The evidence concerning the quality of measurement properties is limited by poor or fair methodological quality. Moreover, limited information regarding measurement properties was provided within the included papers. This review aids the selection process of Brazilian Portuguese PROMs for use in cancer patients. After acknowledging the methodological caveats and strengths of each tool, our opinion is that for quality of life and symptoms assessment the adapted FACT-G version and the ESAS could be recommended, respectively. Future research should rely on the already accepted standards of CCA and validation studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,363,636
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,521
of 2,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,685
of 316,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#18
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,914 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 316,058 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.