Premium
Content validity analysis of the computer proficiency and mobile proficiency questionnaires: Study on proposed Brazilian Portuguese version translated and culturally adapted
Author(s) -
Andrade Alan Cronemberger,
Sampaio Gustavo Guedes Vaz,
Bertolucci Paulo Henrique Ferreira
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
alzheimer's and dementia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.713
H-Index - 118
eISSN - 1552-5279
pISSN - 1552-5260
DOI - 10.1002/alz.044022
Subject(s) - portuguese , clarity , index (typography) , content validity , psychology , face validity , applied psychology , assertiveness , plain language , language proficiency , interpreter , medical education , relevance (law) , clinical psychology , medicine , computer science , social psychology , psychometrics , linguistics , pedagogy , world wide web , political science , law , programming language , philosophy , biochemistry , chemistry
Background Digital technologies can enhance benefits in healthcare. Its use is increasingly present in elderly people daily life. Being a proficient user maybe important for social communication and independent living, and additionally can bring benefits to researchers in testing patients outside the office. The Computer Proficiency (CPQ) and the Mobile Proficiency Questionnaires (MDPQ) proved to be useful in English (United States) and Spanish (Spain) speakers to quantify the degree of proficiency in electronic devices in adults. We lack instruments to measure this in Portuguese. Method Following established practices, an instrument translation from English to Portuguese was prepared by a Brazilian bilingual neurologist. Then, a back‐translation was performed by 2 other specialists for additional adjustments. Afterwards, a panel of 7 experts (4 Cognition and Behavioral neurologists, 1 geriatric psychiatrist, and 1 information technology PhD) categorized the questionnaires items to calculate the Face Validity Index (FVI) for language clarity, and the Content Validity Index (CVI) for practical and theoretical relevance for both individual items (i‐CVI) and whole scales (S‐CVI). Result The results of the translation are shown in the tables (final version in Portuguese included). The comparative back translations obtained good equivalences. The experts group proposed small changes in the use of idiom in a few questionnaires’ items. The expert consensus for the translation assertiveness was considered very good (S‐FVI/Average CPQ=0.96 and MDPQ=0.99), with high levels of unanimous agreement (S‐FVI/UA of 81% and 95%, respectively). The S‐CVI/Ave were considered good for practical (CPQ=0.86 and MDPQ=0.93) and theoretical relevance (CPQ=0.81 and MDPQ=0.85), although the experts’ unanimous agreement was considerably lower. Conclusion The CPQ and MDPQ questionnaires in their Brazilian Portuguese versions achieved satisfactory translated content quality and language clarity. They will need consequent validation and reliability studies in our population. Small changes to better improve the questionnaires in our language are discussed. We aim they can provide a useful tool for Brazilian research on digital devices. Correlation with demographic, cognitive, and functionality data may provide more information on how digital proficiency can be useful to track our patients.