Linguistic and content validation of the translated and culturally adapted PG-SGA, as perceived by Norwegian cancer patients and healthcare professionals. (August 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Henriksen, Christine; Thoresen, Lene; Fjøseide, Berit; Lorentzen, Sissi Stove; Balstad, Trude Rakel; Ottery, Faith D.; Jager-Wittenaar, Harriët
• Is Part Of: Clinical nutrition ESPEN. Volume 38(2020)
• Page Start: 178
• Page End: 184
• Publication Date: 2020-08
• Subjects: Nutritional assessment -- PG-SGA -- Validity; PG-SGA Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment -- SF Short Form ISPOR International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research -- HPC healthcare professionals -- CI Comprehensibility Index -- DI Difficulty Index -- CVI Content Validity Index; Nutritionally induced diseases -- Periodicals; Metabolism -- Disorders -- Periodicals; 616.39005
• DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.05.006
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2405-4577

Abstract

Summary: Background & aims: The Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA©) is a validated nutritional screening, assessment, monitoring, and triage tool. When translated to other languages, the questions and answering items need to be conceptually, semantically, and operationally equivalent to the original tool. In this study, we aimed to assess linguistic and content validity of the PG-SGA translated and culturally adapted for the Norwegian setting, as perceived by Norwegian cancer patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Methods: We have translated and culturally adapted the original PG-SGA for the Norwegian setting, in concordance with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Cancer patients and HCPs, including nurses, dietitians and physicians, were invited to participate. Comprehensibility and difficulty were assessed by patients for the patient component (PG-SGA Short Form), and by HCPs for the professional component. Content validity was assessed for the full PG-SGA by HCPs only. The data were collected by a questionnaire and evaluations were operationalized by a 4-point scale. Item and scale indices were calculated for comprehensibility (Item CI, Scale CI), difficulty (Item DI, Scale DI) and content validity (Item CVI, Scale CVI). Results: Fifty-one cancer patients and 92 HCPs participated in the study. The patients perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the Norwegian PG-SGA Short Form as excellent (Scale CI = 0.99 and DI = 0.97). However, HCPs perceived comprehensibility and difficulty of the professional component as below acceptable (Scale CI = 0.78 and DI = 0.66), and the physical exam was being rated as the most difficult part (Item DI 0.26 to 0.65). Content validity for the full Norwegian PG-SGA was considered excellent (Scale CVI = 0.99) by the HCPs. Conclusion: The patient component of PG-SGA was considered clear and easy to complete, and the full Norwegian PG-SGA was considered as relevant by HCPs. In the final Norwegian PG-SGA, changes have been made to improve comprehensibility of the professional component. To improve perceived difficulty of completing the professional component, training of professionals is indicated.