For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
19
views
21
references
 Top references
cited by
1
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      191
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cross-cultural adaptation, evaluation and validation of the Spouse Response Inventory: a study protocol

      protocol

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Since the response of spouses has been proven to be an important reinforcement of pain behaviour and disability it has been addressed in research and therapy. Fordyce suggested pain behaviour and well behaviour be considered in explaining suffering in chronic pain patients. Among existing instruments concerning spouse's responses the aspect of well behaviour has not been examined so far. The SRI (Spouse Response Inventory) tries to consider pain behaviour and well behaviour and appears to be acceptable because of its brevity and close proximity to daily language. The aim of the study is the translation into German, followed by evaluation and validation, of the SRI on a German sample of patients with chronic pain.

          Methods and analyses

          The study is comprehensively designed: initially, the focus will lie on the translation of the instrument following the guidelines for cross-cultural translation and adaptation and evaluation of the German version according to the source study. Subsequently, a validation referring to predictive, incremental and construct validation will be conducted using instruments based on similar or close but different constructs. Evaluation of the resulting SRI-G (SRI-German) will be conducted on a sample of at least 30 patients with chronic pain attending a comprehensive pain centre. For validation at least 120 patients with chronic headache, back pain, cancer related pain and somatoform pain disorder shall be included, for a total of 480 patients. Separate analyses according to specific pain diagnoses will be performed to ensure psychometric property, interpretability and control of diagnosis of specific limitations. Analyses will include comprehensive investigation of psychometric property of the scale by hierarchical regression analyses, correlation analyses, multivariate analysis of variance and exploratory factor analyses (SPSS).

          Ethics

          The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Dresden (EK 335 122008) based on the Helsinki declaration.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI).

          Robert D Kerns, Dennis C Turk, Thomas Rudy (1985)
          The complexity of chronic pain has represented a major dilemma for clinical researchers interested in the reliable and valid assessment of the problem and the evaluation of treatment approaches. The West Haven-Yale Multidimensional Pain Inventory (WHYMPI) was developed in order to fill a widely recognized void in the assessment of clinical pain. Assets of the inventory are its brevity and clarity, its foundation in contemporary psychological theory, its multidimensional focus, and its strong psychometric properties. Three parts of the inventory, comprised of 12 scales, examine the impact of pain on the patients' lives, the responses of others to the patients' communications of pain, and the extent to which patients participate in common daily activities. The instrument is recommended for use in conjunction with behavioral and psychophysiological assessment strategies in the evaluation of chronic pain patients in clinical settings. The utility of the WHYMPI in empirical investigations of chronic pain is also discussed.
          Article 0 comments Cited 335 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment.

            M Bullinger, J. Alonso, G Apolone … (1998)
            This article describes the methods adopted by the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) project to translate the SF-36 Health Survey. Translation methods included the production of forward and backward translations, use of difficulty and quality ratings, pilot testing, and cross-cultural comparison of the translation work. Experience to date suggests that the SF-36 can be adapted for use in other countries with relatively minor changes to the content of the form, providing support for the use of these translations in multinational clinical trials and other studies. The most difficult items to translate were physical functioning items, which used examples of activities and distances that are not common outside of the United States; items that used colloquial expressions such as pep or blue; and the social functioning items. Quality ratings were uniformly high across countries. While the IQOLA approach to translation and validation was developed for use with the SF-36, it is applicable to other translation efforts.
            Article 0 comments Cited 161 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measurement of pain: patient preference does not confound pain measurement.

              Elizabeth Atkinson, R Ignelzi, Andreas E. Kremer (1981)
              Chronic pain patients reported pain intensity on each of 3 pain intensity scales, the visual analog, numerical and adjectival scales, and then ranked the scales in order of perceived best communication of pain intensity. All patients were able to complete an adjectival scale but 11% were unable to complete a visual analog scale and 2% failed at a numeric scale. The intensity of the pain ratings on the 3 scales were significantly correlated and there were no reliable differences in reported intensity as a function of preference. Pain intensity was reliably higher on each scale for depressed-anxious patients as compared to non-depressed/non-anxious patients. Patients completing all 3 scales indicated a significant preference for the adjectival scale but the basis for this preference did not appear related to sex, etiology of pain, affective variables nor selected psychological variables. These data indicate that pain scale preference does not influence pain intensity report. Nevertheless, there are some clinical situations in which a numeric scale is likely to yield a better measure of pain intensity.
              Article 0 comments Cited 63 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): BMJ Open
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): BMJ Open
                Journal ID (hwp): bmjopen
                Journal ID (publisher-id): bmjopen
                Title: BMJ Open
                Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2044-6055
                Publication date Collection: 2014
                Publication date (Electronic): 14 October 2014
                Volume: 4
                Issue: 10
                Electronic Location Identifier: e005119
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Comprehensive Pain Center, University Hospital of Dresden , Dresden, Germany
                [2 ]Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Harborview Medical Center , Seattle, Washington, USA
                [3 ]Clinic of Medical Psychology and Sociology, University Hospital of Dresden , Dresden, Germany
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Ulrike Kaiser; ulrike.kaiser.usc-tkl@ 123456uniklinikum-dresden.de
                Article
                Publisher ID: bmjopen-2014-005119
                DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-005119
                PMC ID: 4202021
                SO-VID: 62df816b-fe3c-46d9-95b9-4e3c86b0e69b
                Copyright © Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions
                License:

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                Date received : 24 February 2014
                Date revision received : 18 July 2014
                Date accepted : 18 August 2014
                Categories
                Subject: Patient-Centred Medicine
                Subject: Protocol
                Subject: 1506
                Subject: 1722
                Subject: 1724

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine
                Keywords: chronic pain,multimodal pain therapy,spouse response inventory,validation,crosscultural adaptation,study protocol
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Medicine
                Keywords: chronic pain, multimodal pain therapy, spouse response inventory, validation, crosscultural adaptation, study protocol

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content191

                See all similar

                Cited by1

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors390

                See all reference authors