Translation into Greek and initial validity and reliability testing of a modified version of the SCIM III, in both English and Greek, for self-use

References

• Wyndaele M, Wyndaele JJ. Incidence, prevalence and epidemiology of spinal cord injury: what learns a worldwide literature survey? Spinal Cord 2006;44:523–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeVivo MJ, Richards JS. Community reintegration and quality of life following spinal cord injury. Paraplegia 1992;30:108–12
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center (NSCIS). Spinal cord injury facts and figures at a glance. February 2011; Available from: http://www.nscisc.uab.edu/public_content/pdf/Facts%202011%20Feb%20Final.pdf [last accessed 30 Aug 2011]
   Google Scholar
• DeVivo MJ, Chen Y. Trends in new injuries, prevalent cases, and aging with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92:332–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Griffiths C, Foster G, Ramsay J, et al. How effective are expert patient (lay led) education programmes for chronic disease? BMJ 2007;334:1254–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson PM, Kendall S, Brooks F. The expert patients programme: a paradox of patient empowerment and medical dominance. Health Soc Care Commun 2007;15:426–38
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health. The expert patient: a new approach to chronic disease management for the 21st century; 2001; Available from: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4006801 [last accessed 1 Dec 2012]
   Google Scholar
• Hardy P. The expert patient programme: a critical review. Program Eval, Qual Assess Learn Process 2004:1–11
   Google Scholar
• Tyreman S. An expert in what? the need to clarify meaning and expectations in “The Expert Patient”. Med Health Care Philos 2005;8:153–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leach E, Cornwell P, Fleming J, Haines T. Patient centered goal-setting in a subacute rehabilitation setting. Disabil Rehabil 2010;32:159–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter C, Forwell SJ, Jongbloed LE, Backman CL. Community participation after spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:427–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Widerström-Noga E, Biering-Sørensen F, Bryce T, et al. The international spinal cord injury pain basic data set. Spinal Cord 2008;46:818–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garland AF, Kruse M, Aarons GA. Clinicians and outcome measurement: what’s the use? J Behav Health Serv Res 2003;30:393–405
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jette DU, Halbert J, Iverson C, et al. Use of standardized outcome measures in physical therapist practice: perceptions and applications. Phys Therap 2009;89:125–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russek L, Wooden M, Ekedahl S, Bush A. Attitudes toward standardized data collection. Phys Therapy 1997;77:714–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deyo A, William C. Strategies for improving and expanding the application of health status measures in clinical settings: a researcher-developer viewpoint. Med Care 1992;30:MS176–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson J, Shamley D, Jamous MA. A structured review of outcome measures used for the assessment of rehabilitation interventions for spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2008;46:768–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• May L, Day R, Warren S. Perceptions of patient education in spinal cord injury rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:1041–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leduc BE, Lepage Y. Health-related quality of life after spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:196–202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate DG, Kalpakjian CZ, Forchheimer MB. Quality of life issues in individuals with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:S18–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingstone S. On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. Eur J Commun 2003;18:477–500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohn ML. Cross-national research as an analytic strategy. American Sociological Association, 1987. Presidential address. Am Soc Rev 1987;52:713–31
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuechler M. The utility of surveys for cross-national research. Soc Sci Res 1987;16:229–4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofstede G. The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept. Acad Manage Rev 1984;9:389–98
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galea M, Tumminia J, Garback LM. Telerehabilitation in spinal cord injury persons: a novel approach. Telemed J E Health 2006;12:160–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dallolio L, Menarini M, China S, et al. Functional and clinical outcomes of telemedicine in patients with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:2332–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catz A IM. Spinal cord independence measure: comprehensive ability rating scale for the spinal cord lesion patient. J Rehabil Res Dev 2007;44:65–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catz A, Itzkovich M, Steinberg F, et al. Disability assessment by a single rater or a team: a comparative study with the Catz-Itzkovich spinal cord independence measure. J Rehabil Med 2002;34:226–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Itzkovich M, Tamir A, Philo O, et al. Reliability of the Catz-Itzkovich Spinal Cord Independence Measure assessment by interview and comparison with observation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003;82:267–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Athanasiou A, Alexandrou A, Paraskevopoulos E, et al. Towards a Greek adaptation of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM). EANS 2014, Prague, Czech Republic, 2014 Oct 12–17, e-poster presentation (P26.1877), final program book; 2014. 279 p
   Google Scholar
• Michailidou C. Low back pain, quality of life and function in people with incomplete spinal cord injury in USA, UK and Greece [PhD thesis]. Brunel University. Available from Brunel University at http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/7041 [last accessed 3 Feb 2015]
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Process of translation and adaptation of instruments; 2008. Available from: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/ [last accessed 15 May 2008]
   Google Scholar
• Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993;46:1417–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brislin RW. Translation and content analysis or oral and written materials. In: Triandis HC, Berry HW, eds. Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Methodology. Vol. 2. Boston (MA): Allyn and Bacon, Inc.; 1980:389–444
   Google Scholar
• Brislin RW, Lonner WJ, Thorndike RM. Questionnaire wording and translation. In: Spungin G, ed. Cross-cultural research methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 1973:32–58
   Google Scholar
• Michailidou C, Marston L, DeSouza L, Ian Sutherland I. A systematic review of the prevalence of musculoskeletal pain, back and low back pain in people with Spinal Cord Injury. Disabil Rehabil 2014;36:705–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. 11.0 update, 4th ed. Boston (MA): Allyn & Bacon; 2003
   Google Scholar
• Couper MP, Kapteyn A, Schonlau M. Noncoverage and nonresposne in an internet survey. Soc Sci Res 2007;36:131–48
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowling A. Research methods in health. Investigating health and health services. 2nd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Open University Press; 1997
   Google Scholar
• Oppe M, Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D, user guide. On behalf of the EuroQoL Group, version 1. Rotterdam, Netherlands: The EuroQol Group; 2007:1–24
   Google Scholar
• Invernizzi M, Carda S, Milani P, et al. Development and validation of the Italian version of the spinal cord independence measure III. Disabil Rehabil 2010;32:1194–203
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glass CA, Tesio L, Itzkovich M, et al. Spinal Cord Independence Measure, version III: applicability to the UK spinal cord injured population. J Rehabil Med 2009;41:723–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Itzkovich M, Gelernter I, Biering-Sorensen F, et al. The Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) version III: reliability and validity in a multi-center international study. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:1926–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kesiktas N, Paker N, Bugdayci D, et al. Turkish adaptation of Spinal Cord Independence Measure — version III. Int J Rehabil Res 2012;35:88–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995;4:293–307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, et al. Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 Health Survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol 1998;51:1055–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ackerman P, Morrison SA, McDowell S, Vazquez L. Using the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III to measure functional recovery in a post-acute spinal cord injury program. Spinal Cord 2010;48:380–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wirth B, van Hedel HJA, Kometer B, et al. Changes in activity after a complete spinal cord injury as measured by the spinal cord independence measure II (SCIM II). Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008;22:145–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tate DG, Boninger ML, Jackson AB. Future directions for spinal cord injury research: recent developments and model systems contributions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011;92:509–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiss K. The potential of translation criticism. Translation criticism – the potentials & limitations. In: Rhodes EF, trans., 2000. Categories and criteria for translation quality assessment. New York: St. Jerome Publishing and American Bible Society; 1971:9–87
   Google Scholar
• Freeman JA, Hobart JC, Playford ED, et al. Evaluating neurorehabilitation: lessons from routine data collection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 2005;76:723–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgoudis G, Watson PJ, Oldham JA. The development and validation of a Greek version of the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Eur J Pain 2000;4:275–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kitisomprayoonkul W, Klaphajone J, Kovindha A. Thai short-form Mcgill pain questionnaire. J Med Assoc Thai 2006;89:846–53
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Menezes Costa Lda C, Maher CG, McAuley JH, Costa LO. Systematic review of cross-cultural adaptations of McGill Pain Questionnaire reveals a paucity of clinimetric testing. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:934–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Themistocleous GS, Goudelis G, Kyrou I, et al. Translation into Greek, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (DASH). J Hand Ther 2006;19:350–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masedo A, Henley M, Jensen MP, et al. Reliability and validity of a Self-Report FIM(TM) (FIM-SR) in persons with amputation or spinal cord injury and chronic pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005;84:167–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter C. The experience of spinal cord injury: the individual's perspective–implications for rehabilitation practice. Phys Ther 1994;74:614–28; discussion 628–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health. The expert patient: a new approach to chronic disease management for the 21st century; 2001; Available from: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4006801 [last accessed Apr 2013]
   Google Scholar
• Steiner WA, Ryser L, Huber E, et al. Use of the ICF model as a clinical problem-solving tool in physical therapy and rehabilitation medicine. Phys Ther 2002;82:1098–107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar