Search

Objectives: To develop separate item banks for three health domains of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) ranked as important by Singaporeans - physical functioning, social relationships, and positive mindset.Methods: We adapted the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Qualitative Item Review protocol, with input and endorsement from laymen and experts from various relevant fields. Items were generated from 3 sources: 1) thematic analysis of focus groups and in-depth interviews for framework (n = 134 participants) and item(n = 52 participants) development, 2) instruments identified from a literature search (PubMed) of studies that developed or validated a HRQOL instrument among adults in Singapore, 3) a priori identified instruments of particular relevance. Items from these three sources were "binned" and "winnowed" by two independent reviewers, blinded to the source of the items, who harmonized their selections to generate a list of candidate items (each item representing a subdomain). Panels with lay and expert representation, convened separately for each domain, reviewed the face and content validity of these candidate items and provided inputs for item revision. The revised items were further refined in cognitive interviews.Results: Items from our qualitative studies (51 physical functioning, 44 social relationships, and 38 positive mindset), the literature review (36 instruments from 161 citations), and three a priori identified instruments, underwent binning, winnowing, expert panel review, and cognitive interview. This resulted in 160 candidate items (61 physical functioning, 51 social relationships, and 48 positive mindset).Conclusions: We developed item banks for three important health domains in Singapore using inputs from potential end-users and the published literature. The next steps are to calibrate the item banks, develop computerized adaptive tests (CATs) using the calibrated items, and evaluate the validity of test scores when these item banks are administered adaptively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To cross‐culturally adapt the Hamilton axial spondyloarthritis (axial SpA) screening questionnaire and develop a Chinese version for use in a multi‐ethnic Asian population in Singapore. Methods: Consenting participants newly referred from primary care to a rheumatology specialist outpatient clinic for evaluation of possible axial SpA were studied. The original axial SpA questionnaire was revised based on inputs from cognitive debriefing interviews (CDIs) and discussions with an expert panel of rheumatologists and the developer. Forward and back translations of the adapted English version were also reviewed by the expert panel and the developer. The common translation produced was tested in CDIs with Chinese‐speaking participants. Adapted English and Chinese versions were pilot‐tested in a separate group of similar participants. Results: Participants were recruited for English (n = 25) and Chinese CDIs (n = 15, relatively older and less frequently presented with axial SpA symptoms), respectively. Alternative terms and explanatory notes were added to difficult medical terms to improve the understandability of the adapted English version. English medical terms were retained in the Chinese version. Pilot‐testing of the adapted axial SpA questionnaire was performed on 116 participants, all of whom reported ease of comprehension with both adapted versions. Only one participant was diagnosed with axial SpA, who also scored positive on the adapted axial SpA questionnaire. Conclusion: The adapted axial SpA questionnaire demonstrated good sensitivity in the pilot‐testing and appears to be a promising tool for facilitating early identification of axial SpA cases in the multi‐ethnic Asian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To cross-culturally adapt the Connective Tissue Disease (CTD) Screening Questionnaire (CSQ) in a multi-ethnic Asian population in Singapore. Methods: An expert panel of accredited rheumatologists evaluated the content validity of the original CSQ. Consenting participants newly referred from primary care to a rheumatology specialist outpatient clinic for evaluation of possible CTDs were studied. Cognitive debriefing interviews (CDIs) using the original CSQ were conducted with English-speaking participants, with modifications made based on their inputs and in discussion with a second expert panel (rheumatologists and the CSQ developers). Forward and back translations of the adapted English version were reviewed by the second expert panel. The common translation produced was tested in CDIs with Chinese-speaking participants. Adapted English and Chinese versions were pilot tested in a separate group of newly referred patients. Results: Content validity of the original CSQ was confirmed by the expert panel. A total of 30 and 15 participants were recruited for English and Chinese CDIs, respectively. Alternative terms and explanatory notes were added to difficult medical terms in the adapted English CSQ. A further explanatory note was added to one difficult item, and English medical terms were retained in the Chinese version. Pilot testing of the adapted CSQ was performed on 116 participants, which exhibited an overall sensitivity and specificity of 71% and 58%, respectively, in identifying CTDs. Conclusions: The adapted CSQ demonstrated satisfactory sensitivity in the pilot testing and appears to be a promising tool for facilitating early identification of CTDs in the multi-ethnic Asian population. Key Points: • Early identification and management of patients with CTDs is crucial given their high disease burden and short "windows of opportunity." • High reliability and validity of original CSQ and its cross-culturally adapted versions have been reported; however, the CSQ has not been validated in Southeast Asia where CTDs are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to other countries. • Our cross-culturally adapted CSQ demonstrated satisfactory sensitivity in identifying CTDs in the multi-ethnic Asian population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]