A novel method for the translation and cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life patient-reported outcome measurements

Table 1 Two examples of the feedback obtained from the expert panel during Round 1

Round 1—expert panel review using the Delphi method PFDI-20 summary results from Round 1
PFDI-20 items	Achieved equivalence^a between the source and Norwegian version in all the four areas Idiomatic Conceptual Semantic Experiential	Lack of equivalence^b between the source and Norwegian version in all the four areas Idiomatic Conceptual Semantic Experiential	Reason for disagreement If no, which area(s) of equivalence are not met? why?^b	Number of suggestions for alternative wording^c Some panellists disagreed, however did not make any suggestions for alternative wording	Suggestion for alternative wording in Norwegian Can you suggest a change?^c
Question 10	5 Specialists	3 Specialists	Idiomatic equivalence	2 Suggestions	Alternative 1: Har du ofte avføringslekkasje når avføringen er løs eller flytende? Alternative 2: Har du vanligvis avføringslekkasje når avføringen er løs eller flytende?
Question 20	5 Specialists	3 Specialists	Idiomatic equivalence	2 Suggestions	Alternative 1: Kjenner du ofte smerte eller ubehag i nedre del av magen eller underlivet? Alternative 2: Har du ofte smerte eller ubehag i nedre del av magen eller underlivet?

During round 1 the expert panellists were asked to assess the following questions ^aHave all four equivalences been met? ^bIf “No”, which one(s) is/are not met and why? ^cCan you suggest a change or alternative wording. The expert panel was comprised of eight pelvic floor specialists
No measure of consensus was employed in round 1. Voting and consensus commenced during rounds 2–4 (see Table 2)

ISSN: 1477-7525