Swedish translation and content evaluation of the Empowerment Audiology Questionnaire (EmpAQ—15)
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, ISSN: 2509-8020, Vol: 8, Issue: 1, Page: 143
2024
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Objective: Translating the newly developed Empowerment Audiology Questionnaire, EmpAQ-15 to Swedish, and performing content validation on the Swedish version. Design: Best-practice principles using forward and back translations which were revised by a committee prior to field testing. Field testing was conducted by cognitive interviews with hearing-aid users talking through and rating the items in the translated questionnaire. Content validation was assessed by examining equivalence, accessibility, acceptability, comprehensiveness, and relevance of interview data. Questionnaire introduction and scoring instructions were evaluated by Swedish audiologists. Study sample: Ten adult native speaking Swedish hearing aid users, recruited with purposive sampling. Maximum variation based on age, gender, hearing aid usage, and degree of hearing loss. Seven Swedish audiologists assessing instructions for result calculations. Results: The conceptual equivalence between the Swedish translation and the English original questionnaire was judged to be high overall. The instructions and majority of items were experienced as accessible, acceptable, comprehensive, and relevant. The audiologists showed that they could follow scoring instructions and reason about the results. Conclusions: This content validity study was the first step towards a Swedish version of a self- report measure of Empowerment for people with hearing loss.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know