This study aimed to adapt the Social Participation Restrictions Questionnaire (SPaRQ) into Turkish (SPaRQ-T) and assess its validity and reliability for evaluating participation restrictions in adults with hearing loss. A cross-sectional, multicenter study was conducted with 278 individuals with hearing loss who had used hearing aids for at least one year. The adaptation process followed international guidelines, including back-translation and expert evaluation. Rasch analysis, test-retest reliability, and concurrent validity assessments were performed.The SPaRQ-T demonstrated strong internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.926 for Social Behaviors and 0.871 for Social Perceptions) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.928 and 0.773, respectively). Rasch analysis confirmed the unidimensionality of both subscales and supported good model fit. The SPaRQ-T is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing social participation restrictions in Turkish-speaking adults with hearing loss. It provides a comprehensive evaluation of the social and emotional dimensions of participation and can be used in clinical and research settings.
AllenD.HicksonL.FergusonM. (2022). Defining a patient-centred core outcome domain set for the assessment of hearing rehabilitation with clients and professionals. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 16, 787607. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2022.787607
2.
AkramB.NawazJ.RafiZ.AkramA. (2018). Social exclusion, mental health and suicidal ideation among adults with hearing loss: protective and risk factors. Development, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.26438/ijcse/v5i10.351354
3.
AllenJ. C.Jr. (2011). Sample size calculation for two independent groups: A useful rule of thumb. Proceedings of Singapore Healthcare, 20(2), 138–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/201010581102000213
4.
AltuntaşO.ÖzkanE.KöseB.AranO. T.HuriM.AkıE. (2021). Assessment of participation within the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF): The Turkish validity and reliability of the participation scale. Occupational Therapy International, 2021(1), 6658773. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6658773
5.
ArlingerS. (2003). Negative consequences of uncorrected hearing loss-a review. International Journal of Audiology, 42(Suppl 2), 2S17–12S20. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992020309074639
6.
AvierinosR. J.BeukesE.ManchaiahV.OosthuizenI.le RouxT.SwanepoelD. W. (2024). Meaningful life changes following hearing aid use: A qualitative user perspective. International Journal of Audiology, 64(5), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2024.2376043
7.
BeatonD. E.BombardierC.GuilleminF.FerrazM. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
8.
BeckD.LarsenD.BushE. (2018). Speech in noise: Hearing loss, neurocognitive disorders, aging, traumatic brain injury and more. Journal of Otolaryngology–ENT Research, 10(4), 199–205. https://doi.org/10.15406/joentr.2018.10.0034
9.
BernabéE.de OliveiraC.de Oliveira DuarteY. A.Bof de AndradeF.SabbahW. (2023). Social participation and tooth loss, vision, and hearing impairments among older Brazilian adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 71(10), 3152–3162. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.18423
CoxR. M.AlexanderG. C. (2002). The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): Psychometric properties of the English version. International Journal of Audiology, 41(1), 30–35. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992020209101309
12.
DanermarkB.GranbergS.KramerS. E.SelbM.MöllerC. (2013). The creation of a comprehensive and a brief core set for hearing loss using the international classification of functioning, disability and health. American Journal of Audiology, 22(2), 323–328. https://doi.org/10.1044/1059-0889(2013/12-0052)
13.
da RochaN. S.ChachamovichE.de Almeida FleckM. P.TennantA. (2013). An introduction to Rasch analysis for psychiatric practice and research. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47(2), 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.09.014
14.
DavidsonA.MarroneN.WongB.MusiekF. (2021). Predicting hearing aid satisfaction in adults: A systematic review of speech-in-noise tests and other behavioral measures. Ear and Hearing, 42(6), 1485–1498. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000001051
15.
DawesP.EmsleyR.CruickshanksK. J.MooreD. R.FortnumH.Edmondson-JonesM.McCormackA.MunroK. J. (2015). Hearing loss and cognition: The role of hearing aids, social isolation and depression. PLoS One, 10(3), Article e0119616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0119616
16.
de AndradeA. N.SoaresA.SkarzynskaM. B.SkarzynskiP. H.SanfinsM. D.GilD. (2022). Self-perception of hearing difficulties and quality of life in individuals with hearing loss. Audiology Research, 12(5), 527–538. https://doi.org/10.3390/audiolres12050053
17.
FolsteinM. F.FolsteinS. E.McHughP. R. (1975). “Mini−mental state”: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6
18.
GatehouseS.NobleW. (2004). The speech, spatial and qualities of hearing scale (SSQ). International Journal of Audiology, 43(2), 85–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992020400050014
19.
GüngenC.ErtanT.EkerE.YaşarR.EnginF. (2002). Standardize mini mental test’in Türk toplumunda hafif demans tanısında geçerlik ve güvenilirliği [Reliability and validity of the standardized mini mental state examination in the diagnosis of mild dementia in Turkish population]. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 13(4), 273–281. https://turkpsikiyatri.com/PDF/C13S4/standardizeMini.pdf.
20.
HeffernanE.CoulsonN. S.FergusonM. A. (2018). Development of the Social Participation Restrictions Questionnaire (SPaRQ) through consultation with adults with hearing loss, researchers, and clinicians: A content evaluation study. International Journal of Audiology, 57(10), 791–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2018.1483585
21.
HeffernanE.CoulsonN. S.HenshawH.BarryJ. G.FergusonM. A. (2016). Understanding the psychosocial experiences of adults with mild-moderate hearing loss: An application of Leventhal’s self-regulatory model. International Journal of Audiology, 55(sup3), S3–S12. https://doi.org/10.3109/14992027.2015.1117663
22.
HeffernanE.MaidmentD. W.BarryJ. G.FergusonM. A. (2019). Refinement and validation of the social participation restrictions questionnaire: An application of Rasch analysis and traditional psychometric analysis techniques. Ear and Hearing, 40(2), 328–339. https://doi.org/10.1097/AUD.0000000000000618
23.
HelvikA. -S.JacobsenG. W.HallbergL. R. (2006). Life consequences of hearing loss in terms of activity limitation and participation restriction. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 8(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/15017410500300413
HoumøllerS.WolffA.MöllerS.NarneV.NarayananS.GodballeC.HougaardD.LoquetG.GaihedeM.HammershøiD. (2022). Prediction of successful hearing aid treatment in first-time and experienced hearing aid users: Using the international outcome inventory for hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology, 61(2), 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2021.1916632CrossMarkLogoCrossMark
26.
IllgA.AmannE.KoinigK. A.AndersonI.LenarzT.Billinger-FinkeM. (2023). A holistic perspective on hearing loss: First quality-of-life questionnaire (HL-QOL) for people with hearing loss based on the international classification of functioning, disability, and health. Frontiers in Audiology and Otology, 1, 1207220. https://doi.org/10.3389/fauot.2023.1207220
27.
KateifidisN.SarafisP.MalliarouM.TsounisA.BamidisP.NiakasD. (2016). Quality of life and satisfaction among patients who use hearing aids. Global Journal of Health Science, 9(6), 177. https://doi.org/10.5539/gjhs.v9n6p177
28.
KleinR. F. (2004). Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Canadian Psychology, 45(4), 317–319. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.162.3.643-a
29.
KooT. K.LiM. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
30.
KumarS.BiradarK.MarlapudiS. K.DuttaA. (2024). Hearing aids and quality of life: A psychological perspective. Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, 76(1), 852–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-023-04297-w
LevasseurM.TribbleD. S.-C.DesrosiersJ. (2006). Analyse du concept qualité de vie dans le contexte des personnes âgées avec incapacités physiques. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 73(3), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.2182/cjot.05.0013
33.
McNeishD. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144
34.
MokkinkL. B.PrinsenC.PatrickD. L.AlonsoJ.BouterL. M.De VetH.TerweeC. B. (2019). COSMIN study design checklist for patient-reported outcome measurement instruments (pp. 1–32). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: COSMIN.
35.
MondelliM. F. C. G.de SouzaP. J. S. (2012). Quality of life in elderly adults before and after hearing aid fitting. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology, 78(3), 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-86942012000300010
36.
Prieur ChaintréA.CouturierY.NguyenT. T.LevasseurM. (2024). Influence of hearing loss on social participation in older adults: Results from a scoping review. Research on Aging, 46(1), 72–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/01640275231174561
37.
StephensD.HétuR. (1991). Impairment, disability and handicap in audiology: Towards a consensus. Audiology, 30(4), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.3109/00206099109072885
38.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S.UllmanJ. B. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
39.
TasellD. J. V. (1993). Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 36(2), 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3602.228
40.
TennantA.ConaghanP. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper ?Arthritis Care & Research, 57(8), 1358–1362. https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fart.23108
41.
UddinM. N.IslamF. M. A. (2019). Psychometric evaluation of an interview-administered version of the WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire for use in a cross-sectional study of a rural district in Bangladesh: An application of Rasch analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 19(1), 216. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4026-0
42.
Van BrakelW. H.AndersonA. M.MutatkarR.BakirtziefZ.NichollsP. G.RajuM.Das-PattanayakR. K. (2006). The participation scale: Measuring a key concept in public health. Disability and Rehabilitation, 28(4), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280500192785
ZhaoH.WangX.ShiY. (2023). The effect of hearing impairment and social participation on depressive symptoms in older adults: A cross-lagged analysis. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 17, 1240587. https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2023.1240587
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
