Erratum to: Reliability and Validity of the Arabic Version of the SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire in Population of Khat Chewers—Jazan Region-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Properties of Quality of Life Scales for Arabic-Speaking Adults: A systematic review

“…9, The majority were conducted in the Middle Eastern and North African region, including Jordan (n = 7), Saudi Arabia (n = 4), Egypt (n = 2), Morocco (n = 2), Kuwait (n = 2), Tunisia (n = 2), Lebanon (n = 2), the United Arab Emirates (UAE; n = 2), Sudan (n = 1) and Qatar (n = 1). 9,13,14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]37,38 However, two studies were conducted in the Netherlands among samples of Moroccan Arabic-speaking subjects. 15,36 The majority of the studies (n = 21) had translated the QOL scales into modern standard Arabic suitable for use among all Arabic-speaking populations.…”

“…15,36 The majority of the studies (n = 21) had translated the QOL scales into modern standard Arabic suitable for use among all Arabic-speaking populations. 9,13,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]38 However, six had translated the scales into Arabic dialects only suitable for specific populations, including Moroccan Arabic (n = 3), Tunisian Arabic (n = 2) and Egyptian Arabic (n = 1). [14][15][16][17]36,37 All of the studies utilised quantitative research methods, with 20 crosssectional and seven longitudinal surveys.…”

“…9,[13][14][15][18][19][20][21][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]32,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48] For the remaining five studies, no information was available. 16,17,22,31,33 Internal consistency was generally high, with 26 studies scoring positively. 9,13, Only one study did not report information regarding internal consistency.…”

“…18,19 The remaining 25 studies did not provide any information concerning this psychometric property. 9,[13][14][15][16][17][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] Construct validity was assessed in 22 studies, of which 21 received positive ratings. 9,[13][14][15][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]37,38 Only one study was rated as intermediate for this aspect.…”

“…The SF-36 was tested using eight psychometric criteria, with positive ratings for content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, construct validity, agreement, reliability, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects. 9,15,17,18,22,31,[36][37][38] Similarly, the WHOQOL-BREF received positive scores for content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity and construct validity, although both reliability and floor and ceiling effects were rated as indeterminate. [19][20][21]33 The processes of translation and cultural adaptation of the QOL scales are presented in Table 4.…”