• BMJ open · Aug 2019

    Symptom screening in paediatrics tool for screening multiple symptoms in Brazilian patients with cancer: a cross-sectional validation study.

    • Sandra de Andrade Cadamuro, Julia Onishi Franco, Carlos Eduardo Paiva, Cleyton Zanardo de Oliveira, and PaivaBianca Sakamoto RibeiroBSR0000-0002-2711-8346Oncology Graduate Program and Research Group on Palliative Care and Health-Related Quality of Life (GPQual), Barretos Cancer Hospital, BARRETOS, Brazil bsrpaiva@gmail.com..
    • Oncology Graduate Program and Research Group on Palliative Care and Health-Related Quality of Life (GPQual), Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil.
    • BMJ Open. 2019 Aug 2; 9 (8): e028149.

    ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Symptom Screening in Paediatrics Tool (SSPedi) into the Brazilian Portuguese language to be used by paediatric oncology patients in Brazil.DesignA descriptive, cross-sectional study that follows an established methodology for translation and cultural adaptation, developed in two phases: phase I, linguistic translation and cultural adaptation of the SSPedi scale and phase II, psychometric properties evaluation.SettingChildren's Hospital for Cancer Treatment in Latin America.ParticipantsPaediatric patients between 7 and 18 years of age and proxies of patients between 2 and 6 years of age, diagnosed with cancer and undergoing chemotherapy treatment. Patients and proxies with significant neuropsychiatric disorders and/or visual impairment that prevented the ability to read were excluded.Primary Outcome MeasuresConstruct validation of SSPedi using convergent validity and contrasted groups. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha test and assessing the retest using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).ResultsThe psychometric properties of the symptom screening tool were evaluated using 157 participants, of which 116 were patients and 41 were proxies. Convergent validity and hypothesised correlations (Spearman's r>0.4) were confirmed for both self- and proxy-reported versions of the assessment tool. No significant differences found between the two contrasting groups. Assessment of SSPedi resulted in an internal consistency of reliability of α=0.77 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.82) for the self and α=0.81 (95% CI 0.71 to 0.88) for the proxy and overall reproducibility ICC values of (95% CI), 0.54 (0.15 to 0.77) and 0.77 (0.64 to 0.86).ConclusionSSPedi was found to be culturally and linguistically adaptable and considered valid and reliable for use by paediatric oncology patients in Brazil. The new translated and adapted version was named SSPedi-BR.© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,694,794 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.