Cross-cultural adaptation and evaluation of the participation and environment measure for children and youth to the indian context—a mixed-methods study

10Citations
Citations of this article
70Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Culturally appropriate measures enable knowledge transfer and quality improvement of rehabilitation services in diverse contexts. The Applied Cultural Equivalence Framework (ACEF) was used in a two-phased mixed methods study to adapt and evaluate the Participation and Environment Measure-Children and Youth (PEM-CY) in India. Cognitive interviews with caregivers of children with disabilities (n = 15) aged 5–17 years established conceptual, item, semantic, and operational equivalence of the Indian PEM-CY. Construct validity was assessed by comparing PEM-CY scores of children with and without disabilities (n = 130) using a case-control design. Cognitive interviews resulted in operational (60.3%), semantic (26.4%), and item-level (13.2%) modifications in the PEM-CY with no changes at the conceptual level. Internal consistency (n = 130) was acceptable to excellent (0.61–0.87) on most scales. Test–retest reliability (n = 30) was good to excellent (ICC ≥ 0.75, Kappa 0.6–1.0) for most scales. Significant differences in all PEM-CY summary scores were found between children with and without disabilities, except for environmental supports. Children with disabilities had lower scores on frequency and involvement in activities across all settings; their caregivers desired greater change in participation and reported experiencing more environmental barriers across settings. Findings suggest the adapted PEM-CY is a valid and reliable measure for assessing the participation of Indian children.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Srinivasan, R., Kulkarni, V., Smriti, S., Teplicky, R., & Anaby, D. (2021). Cross-cultural adaptation and evaluation of the participation and environment measure for children and youth to the indian context—a mixed-methods study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041514

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free