IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0223042.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of a cross-NTD toolkit for assessment of NTD-related morbidity and disability. A cross-cultural qualitative validation of study instruments in Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Janneke Fischer
  • Benita Jansen
  • Alberto Rivera
  • Libardo J Gómez
  • Martha C Barbosa
  • Jorge L Bilbao
  • José M González
  • Luis Restrepo
  • Yesenia Vidal
  • Ruth M H Peters
  • Wim H van Brakel

Abstract

Background: Many neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) are not fatal, but they are disabling, disfiguring and stigmatizing. More accurate data on these aspects would benefit planning, monitoring and evaluation of interventions, as well as provision of appropriate services for the often life-long consequences. In 2015, a cross-NTD toolkit was developed, consisting of a variety of existing questionnaires to measure morbidity, disability and health-related quality of life. The toolkit covers the domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework. These tools have been developed in a source country, however, it was intended for the cross-NTD toolkit to be applicable across NTDs in many countries with different cultures and languages in order to generate universally comparative data. Therefore; the present study aimed to validate several tools of the toolkit among people affected by leprosy or leishmaniasis in the cultural settings of Cartagena and Cúcuta, Colombia. Methodology: This study aimed to validate the following tools among 55 participants between 18–85 years old, affected by leprosy and leishmaniasis: (I) Clinical Profile, (II) Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ), (III) WHO Quality of Life assessment-abbreviated version (WHOQOL-BREF), and (IV) WHO Quality of Life assessment-Disability (WHOQOL-DIS). The tools were administered during face-to-face interviews and were followed by open questions about the respondents’ thoughts on format of the tool and the understanding, relevance and acceptability of the items. The tools were validated using a qualitative method approach based on the framework for cultural equivalence, measured by the cultural, item, semantic and operational equivalences. Results: The Clinical Profile was seen as acceptable and relevant, only the semantic equivalence was not as satisfying and needs a few adaptations. The SRQ was very well understood and shows to reach the equivalences for the population of Colombia without any additional changes. Several items of the WHOQOL-BREF and the WHOQOL-DIS were not well understood and changes are recommended due to semantic difficulties. Operational equivalence of both questionnaires was not as desired in relation to the used response scales. The participants shared that the tools are relevant and important for their particular situation. Conclusions/Significance: The SRQ is found to be a valid tool for Colombia and can be included in the cross-NTD toolkit. The Clinical Profile, WHOQOL-BREF & WHOQOL-DIS need changes and retesting among Colombian people affected by an NTD. The toolkit as a whole is seen as useful to show the effects leprosy and leishmaniasis have on the participants. This cultural validation will contribute to a universally applicable cross-NTD toolkit.

Suggested Citation

  • Janneke Fischer & Benita Jansen & Alberto Rivera & Libardo J Gómez & Martha C Barbosa & Jorge L Bilbao & José M González & Luis Restrepo & Yesenia Vidal & Ruth M H Peters & Wim H van Brakel, 2019. "Validation of a cross-NTD toolkit for assessment of NTD-related morbidity and disability. A cross-cultural qualitative validation of study instruments in Colombia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-26, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0223042
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223042
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0223042&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0223042?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0223042. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.