A Systematic Review of Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Instruments for the Selection of Assistive Technologies

Table 2

Evaluation of the methodological quality of the included studies through the COSMIN checklist with 4-point rating scale: consensus-based standard for the selection of health measurement instruments [4, 12].

Instruments	Authors/year/language	Internal consistency (A)	Reliability (B)	Measurement error (C)	Content validity (D)	Structural validity (E)	Cross-cultural validity (G)	Criterion validity (H)	Responsiveness (I)
Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0)	de Carvalho et al. [31]/2014.; From English to Brazilian Portuguese	Good	Good	Fair	Good	Good	Excellent	Good	Good
Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS)	Demers et al. [32]/2002.; From English to French Canadian	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent
Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 1.0)	Brandt [33]/2005.; North American English to Danish	Fair	Poor	Poor	Fair	Poor	Good	Poor	Poor
Family Impact of Assistive Technology Scale (FIATS)	Bek et al. [34]/2012.; North American English into Turkish	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent
Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0)	Mao et al. [35]/2010.; From English to Chinese (Mandarin)	Excellent	Good	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent	Excellent

The following property was not used in the study: box F. Hypotheses testing.