Cited by 38Endometriosis Research and TreatmentHealth Education and ValidationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Validação de versão para o português de questionário sobre qualidade de vida para mulher com endometriose (Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire - EHP-30)

Open access
Mengarda, Cláudia Vieira, Passos, Eduardo Pandolfi, Picon, Patrícia, Costa, Andry Fiterman, Picon, Paulo Dornelles·2008·Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

Abstract

PURPOSE: the objective of the present study was the development of the Brazilian Portuguese version of Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire (EHP-30), the cross-cultural adaptation to Brazil and the evaluation of EHP-30 Portuguese psychometric measures in a Brazilian sample. METHODS: the original instrument in English was translated into Portuguese following international guidelines, going through all stages of translation, back-translation and comparison of the versions for cross-cultural adaptation, face and content validity. A sample of 54 patients with endometriosis was used for internal consistency analyses using the Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated through the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In order to evaluate the convergent construct validity, the correlation between EHP-30 Portuguese and WHOQOL-Bref and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) was tested. RESULTS: internal consistency presented alpha values of 0.8 to 0.9 suggesting homogeneity between questions. The test-retest reliability presented ICC of 0.8 to 0.9 showing instrument stability. In the construct validation, strong correlations were demonstrated of the EHP-30 Portuguese self-image scale with physical (-0.6) and psychological domains (-0.6) of WHOQOL-Bref, and EHP-30 Portuguese social support scale with BDI (0.5), confirming good correlation with other quality of life evaluation instruments. CONCLUSIONS: the EHP-30 Portuguese was found to be an easy, quickly applied instrument, and well-accepted by the patients. It presented good psychometric properties with appropriate reliability measures (internal consistency and test-retest reliability) and construct validity. These results show that EHP-30 Portuguese is an adequate instrument for quality of life evaluation in Brazilian women with endometriosis, both in clinical and research setting.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1590/s0100-72032008000800003

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Pereira LV, Sousa FAEF. Mensuração e avaliação da dor pós-operatória: 18. uma breve revisão. Rev Latinoam Enferm. 1998;6(3):77-84.
  2. Fleck MPA, Louzada S, Xavier M, Chachamovich E, Vieira G, 20. Santos L, et al. Aplicação da versão em português do instrumento abreviado de avaliação da qualidade de vida "WHOQOL-bref". Rev Saude Publica. 2000;34(2):178-83.
  3. Testa MA, Simonson DC. Assesment of quality-of-life outcomes. N 26. Engl J Med. 1996;334(13):835-40.
  4. Miceli AVP. Dor crônica e subjetividade em oncologia. Rev Bras 28. Cancerol. 2002;48(3):363-73.
  5. Aigner M, Förster-Streffleur S, Prause W, Freidl M, Weiss M, 30. Bach M. What does the WHOQOL-Bref measure? Measurement overlap between quality of life and depressive symptomatology in chronic somatoform pain disorder. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2006;41(1):81-6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mengarda, C. V., Passos, E. P., Picon, P., Costa, A. F., & Picon, P. D.
Affiliations
  • Governo do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
  • Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (BR)
Venue
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Published
2008-08
Volume
30
Issue
8
Pages
384-92
ISSN
0100-7203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998900473
Cited by
38
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Revista Brasileira Ginecologia e Obstetrícia (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Endometriosis Research and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
endometriosis, quality of life, Brazilian Portuguese translation, cross-cultural adaptation, psychometric validation, test-retest reliability, internal consistency, construct validity, WHOQOL-BREF, Beck Depression Inventory, social support, self-image
MeSH terms
Adult, Brazil, Endometriosis, Female, Genital Diseases, Female, Humans, Language, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review