A New Approach to Assessing Children's Interpretation of Severity Qualifiers in a Multi-Attribute Utility Instrument-The EQ-5D-Y-5L: Development and Testing.

INTRODUCTION: The beta EQ-5D-Y-5L is a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for children aged 8-15 years that is currently under development by the EuroQol Group. The EQ-5D-Y-5L is similar to the EQ-5D-Y but has five levels of severity per dimension rather than three. The increased number of levels increases the granularity of the responses but possibly has also increased the difficulty of distinguishing between levels. The EuroQoL's Version Management Committee (VMC) required a robust method to determine how well children distinguish between the five EQ-5D-Y-5L ordinal severity qualifiers (i.e. 'no problems' through to 'extreme problems'), which are a critical aspect of both health measurement and the valuation of health states. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the development, testing, selection, and piloting of such a method. METHODS: Following a literature review and consultation with the wider VMC and a Language Support Services agency, a range of exercises were developed to assess the ordering and comprehension of the five severity qualifiers. Three exercises were pre-tested with children in Spain and New Zealand. One exercise, preferred and understood by children, was then piloted. RESULTS: Five children in Spain and 11 in New Zealand tested the three exercises. In both countries, all children found the three exercises easy to understand and complete. Of the 12 children who expressed a preference, nine said they preferred the card ranking. Card ranking also allowed the interviewer to observe difficult choices being made as the children physically rearranged the card order until they settled on their final order. Following rigorous assessment of translatability and cultural portability by an independent Language Support Service, card ranking was piloted in South Africa (n = 9) and in Indonesia (n = 10), where it highlighted severity qualifier order inversions that would otherwise not have been detected. CONCLUSION: The card ranking exercise was found to be a preferred and acceptable means of testing the ordering of translations of severity qualifiers among children. Additional formal testing of the exercise in other countries and languages is now underway. The approach developed and tested by the VMC for cognitive debriefing of beta EQ-5D-Y-5L language/country versions may also be useful in determining the adequacy of translated qualifiers in debriefing of adult EQ-5D-5L versions and other PROMs.

Dutch translation and linguistic validation of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™).

BACKGROUND: The U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™) is a library of items for assessing symptomatic adverse events by patient self-report in oncology trials. The aim of this multi-site study was to generate and linguistically validate a Dutch language version of the U.S. PRO-CTCAE for use in the Netherlands and Dutch-speaking Belgium. METHODS: All 124 items in the PRO-CTCAE item library were translated into Dutch using established translation procedures, including dual forward translations, reconciliation, back-translation, reconciliation of the source with the back-translation, and expert reviews. Harmonization of the translation for use in both the Netherlands and Belgium was achieved via an iterative review process in which the translations were discussed and reconciled by consensus of PRO experts, clinicians and bilingual Dutch translators. The translated PRO-CTCAE™ items were completed by a geographically-diverse sample of Dutch speaking patients from the Netherlands (n = 40) and Belgium (n = 60), and who were currently receiving or who had recently completed cancer-directed therapy. Patients were diverse with respect to age, sex, educational attainment, and cancer diagnosis. Cognitive debriefing, using a semi-structured interview guide, probed for comprehension and clarity of PRO-CTCAE symptom terms, attributes (e.g. frequency, severity, interference), response choices, and understanding of 'at its worst' and 'in the last 7 days'. Items for which the patient data indicated possible difficulties were considered for revision. RESULTS: Three items underwent minor phrasing revision and retesting was not deemed necessary. The symptom term for stretch marks was poorly understood by 12.5% of participants, and this item was revised to include parenthetical phrasing. It was retested with 10 participants from Belgium (n = 5) and the Netherlands (n = 5) and demonstrated acceptable comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: The Dutch language version of PRO-CTCAE has been successfully developed and linguistically validated for use in oncology studies in the Netherlands and Dutch-speaking Belgium. Extending the availability of NCI PRO-CTCAE in languages beyond English increases international consistency in the capture of Patient-Reported outcomes in patients participating in cancer clinical trials.