↓ Skip to main content

Adaptation of Chinese and English versions of the Ankylosing Spondylitis quality of life (ASQoL) scale for use in Singapore

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Adaptation of Chinese and English versions of the Ankylosing Spondylitis quality of life (ASQoL) scale for use in Singapore
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1715-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ying Ying Leung, Weixian Lee, Nai Lee Lui, Matthew Rouse, Stephen P. McKenna, Julian Thumboo

Abstract

To cross-culturally adapt and validate the Singapore Chinese and Singapore English versions of the Ankylosing Spondylitis Quality of Life (ASQoL) scales. Translation of the ASQoL into Singapore Chinese and English was performed by professional and lay translation panels. Field-testing for face and content validity was performed by interviewing ten Chinese speaking and ten English speaking axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) patients. AxSpA patients (either Chinese or English speaking) were invited to take part in validation surveys. The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), Bath Indices, and other measures of disease activity were used as comparator scales for convergent validity. A separate sample of AxSpA patients were invited to participate in a test-retest postal study, with 2 weeks between administrations. The cross-sectional study included 183 patients (77% males, 82% English speaking), with a mean (SD) age of 39.4 (13.7) years. The ASQoL had excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.88), and correlated moderately with all the comparator scales. The ASQoL was able to distinguish between patients grouped by disease activity and perceived general health. The ASQoL fulfilled the Rasch model analysis for fit, reliability and unidimensionality requirements. No significant differential item functioning was noted for gender, age below or above 50 years, and language of administration. Test-retest reliability was good (r = 0.81). The ASQoL was adapted into Singapore Chinese and English language versions, and shown to be culturally relevant, valid and reliable when used with combined samples of AxSpA patients who speak either Chinese or English.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 25%
Researcher 5 25%
Professor 2 10%
Lecturer 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 10%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 August 2017.
All research outputs
#9,700,260
of 12,131,591 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,907
of 2,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,244
of 266,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#40
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,131,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.