References, 19, 1/2005 | AB Soft ii specs

Test-Retest Reliability and Alternate-Forms Reliability: the Hindi Translation

Finally, one study combined an examination of both test-retest reliability and alternate-forms reliability (Saxena et al., 1999). In this study, 100 patients with cancer who spoke both English and Hindi completed both language versions of the BPI on different days in a counterbalanced design. In addition to reporting reliability based on internal consistency, the study design allowed calculation of the alternate-forms reliability of the BPI. Treating the Hindi and English versions of the BPI as alternate test forms, the alternate-form reliabilities of the interference and severity subscales were 0.88 and 0.95, respectively. These reliabilities demonstrated that the Hindi and English versions could be substituted for one another in assessing the severity of pain and its impact in bilingual patients. These data also provided support for the high test-retest reliability of the BPI.

In summary, the BPI is reliable to the extent that high test-retest reliability and alternate-form reliability is demonstrated when pain is stable or when pain changes in a predictable way.

References

American Psychological Association, American Educational Research Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests. Washington DC: 1974.

Cleeland CS. The impact of pain on the patient with cancer. Cancer 54(11 Suppl): 2635-2641, 12/1984.

Cleeland CS. Measurement of pain by subjective report. In: Chapman CR, Loeser JD, editors. Issues in Pain Measurement. New York: Raven Press; pp. 391-403, 1989 Advances in Pain Research and Therapy; Vol. 12.

Cleeland CS. Assessment of pain in cancer: measurement issues. In: Foley KM, Bonica JJ, Ventafridda V, editors. Proceedings of the Second International Congress on Cancer Pain. New York: Raven Press; pp. 47-55, 1990 Advances in Pain Research and Therapy; Vol. 16.

Cleeland CS. Pain assessment in cancer. In: Osoba D, editor. Effect of Cancer on Quality of Life. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Inc.; pp. 293-305, 1991.

Cleeland CS, Gonin R, Hatfield AK, Edmonson JH, Blum RH, Stewart JA, Pandya KJ. Pain and its treatment in outpatients with metastatic cancer. N Engl J Med 330(9): 592-596, 3/1994.

Cleeland CS, Nakamura Y, Mendoza TR, Edwards KR, Douglas J, Serlin RC. Dimensions of the impact of cancer pain in a four country sample: new information from multidimensional scaling. Pain 67(2-3): 267-273, 10/1996.

Cleeland CS, Ryan KM. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singapore 23(2): 129-138, 3/1994.

Daut RL, Cleeland CS. The prevalence and severity of pain in cancer. Cancer 50(9): 1913-1918, 11/1982.

Daut RL, Cleeland CS, Flanery RC. Development of the Wisconsin Brief Pain Questionnaire to assess pain in cancer and other diseases. Pain 17(2): 197-210, 10/1983.

Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Farrar JT, Haythornthwaite JA, Jensen MP, Katz NP, Kerns RD, Stucki G, Allen RR, Bellamy N, Carr DB, Chandler J, Cowan P, Dionne R, Galer BS, Hertz S, Jadad AR, Kramer LD, Manning DC, Martin S, McCormick CG, McDermott MP, McGrath P, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Robbins W, Robinson JP, Rothman M, Royal MA, Simon L, Stauffer JW, Stein W, Tollett J, Wernicke J, Witter J. Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 113(1-2):

9-19, 1/2005.

Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Wyrwich KW, Beaton D, Cleeland CS, Farrar JT, Haythornthwaite JA, Jensen MP, Kerns RD, Ader DN, Brandenburg N, Burke LB, Cella D, Chandler J, Cowan P, Dimitrova R, Dionne R, Hertz S, Jadad AR, Katz NP, Kehlet H, Kramer LD, Manning DC, McCormick C, McDermott MP, McQuay HJ, Patel S, Porter L, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Rauschkolb C, Revicki DA, Rothman M, Schmader KE, Stacey BR, Stauffer JW, von ST, White RE, Witter J, Zavisic S. Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain