Quality of Life Research

, Volume 11, Issue 6, pp 583–592 | Cite as

The Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS): Translation and preliminary psychometric evaluation of a Canadian–French version

  • Louise Demers
  • Michèle Monette
  • Micheline Descent
  • Jeffrey Jutai
  • Christina Wolfson


This article reports on the Canadian–French translation of the Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS), a 26-item questionnaire that measures the quality of life (QoL) impacts of using assistive technologies from the person with disability's point of view. Following standard procedures, the study included forward and backward translations, committee reviewing, pre-testing with bilingual lay people, and psychometric evaluation of the translated questionnaire with subjects with mobility impairment (n = 83) and visual impairment (n = 37). The use of translators translating in their mother tongue and the participation of one author of the questionnaire contributed to the quality of the translation. We found that words that had equivalence in English and French did not necessarily cover the same areas of meaning. The subscales (n = 3) and total scale of the French PIADS achieved good test–retest stability (ICC of 0.77–0.90) and internal consistency (0.75–0.94). Concurrent validity with the source PIADS also produced acceptable coefficients (0.77–0.83). At the item level, non-significant t test (p > 0.10) results supported the premise that the scores were not different across languages, except for two items. The results are robust enough to recommend the use of the Canadian–French questionnaire for the investigation of the QoL impacts of assistive technologies for persons with disability.

Assistive technology measurement instrument Psychometric testing Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices questionnaire Translation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Minkel JL. Assistive technology andoutcome measurement: Where do we begin? Technol Disabil 1996; 5: 285-288.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Scherer MJ. Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disabil Rehabil 1996; 18: 439-448.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oldridge NB. Outcomes measurement: Health-related quality of life. Assist Technol 1996; 8: 82-93.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Day H, Jutai J. Measuring the psychosocial impact of assistive devices: The PIADS. Can J Rehabil 1996; 9: 159-168.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mehrabian A, Russell J. An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1974.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vallerand RJ. Toward a methodology for the transcultural validation of psychological questionnaires: Implications for research in the French language. Can Psychol 1989; 30: 662-680.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-relatedquality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1417-1432.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    International Federation of Multiple Sclerosis Societies. Recordof disability for multiple sclerosis. New York: National Multiple Sclerosis Society, 1985.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86: 420-428.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nunally JC, Bernstein IR. Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    DeVellis RF. Scale Development Theory andApplications. Newbury Park: Sage, 1991.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Norman GR, Streiner DL. PDQ Statistics. Hamilton: B.C. Decker, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jutai J, Rigby P, Ryan S, Stickel S. Psychosocial impact of electronic aids to daily living. Asst Technol 2000; 12: 123-131.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leplege A, Ecosse E, Verdier A, Perneger TV. The French SF-36 Health Survey: translation, cultural adaptation and preliminary psychometric evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 1013-1023.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perneger TV, Leplege A, Etter JF. Cross-cultural adaptation of a psychometric instrument: Two methods compared. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 1037-1046.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hachey R, Jumoorty J, Mercier C. Methodology for validating the translation of test measurements applied to occupational therapy. Occup Ther Inter 1995; 2: 190-203.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Louise Demers
    • 1
  • Michèle Monette
    • 1
  • Micheline Descent
    • 2
  • Jeffrey Jutai
    • 3
  • Christina Wolfson
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Community StudiesLady Davis Institute for Medical ResearchMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Institut de réadaptation en déficience physique du QuébecQuebec CityCanada
  3. 3.School of Occupational TherapyUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations