↓ Skip to main content

Linguistic validation, validity and reliability of the British English versions of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and QuickDASH in people with rheumatoid arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Linguistic validation, validity and reliability of the British English versions of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and QuickDASH in people with rheumatoid arthritis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12891-018-2032-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison Hammond, Yeliz Prior, Sarah Tyson

Abstract

Although the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire is widely used in the UK, no British English version is available. The aim of this study was to linguistically validate the DASH into British English and then test the reliability and validity of the British English DASH, (including the Work and Sport/Music DASH) and QuickDASH, in people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The DASH was forward translated, reviewed by an expert panel and cognitive debriefing interviews undertaken with 31 people with RA. Content validity was evaluated using the ICF Core Set for RA. Participants with RA (n = 340) then completed the DASH, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Short Form Health Survey v2 (SF36v2) and Measure of Activity Performance of the Hand (MAPHAND). We examined internal consistency and concurrent validity for the DASH, Work and Sport/Music DASH modules and QuickDASH. Participants repeated the DASH to assess test-retest reliability. Minor wording changes were made as required. The DASH addresses a quarter of Body Function and half of Activities and Participation codes in the ICF RA Core Set. Internal consistency for DASH scales were consistent with individual use (Cronbach's alpha = 0.94-0.98). Concurrent validity was strong with the HAQ (rs = 0.69-0.91), SF36v2 Physical Function (rs = - 0.71 - - 0.85), Bodily Pain (rs = - 0.71 - - 0.74) scales and MAPHAND (rs = 0.71-0.93). Test-retest reliability was good (rs = 0.74-0.95). British English versions of the DASH, QuickDASH and Work and Sport/Music modules are now available to evaluate upper limb disabilities in the UK. The DASH, QuickDASH, Work and Sport/Music modules are reliable and valid to use in clinical practice and research with British people with RA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 20 17%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Professor 5 4%
Other 25 21%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 20%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Computer Science 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 42 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 26 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,516,781
of 23,981,346 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#507
of 4,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,026
of 299,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#10
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,981,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 299,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.