Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study

Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599" }, "headline": "Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population...", "datePublished": "2023-12-18T14:29:18", "dateModified": "2024-08-08T15:14:38", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Mohammad Sidiq" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Arunachalam Ramachandran" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Balamurugan Janakiraman" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Faizan Zaffar Kashoo" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Aksh Chahal" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Janvhi Singh" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Yousef Almotairi" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Abdul Aziz Almotairi" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Mohammad Miraj" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Sai Jaya Prakash CH" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Krishna Reddy Vajrala" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Ramprasad Muthukrishnan" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Praveen Kumar Kandakurti" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background To ensure the validity and therapeutic utility of the Neck disability index (NDI) scale, translations, cultural adaptations and psychometric evidence is necessary. This study aimed to address the absence of a suitable and validated Hindi version of the NDI for the rural population. The specific objectives were to translate, adapt, and evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Hindi version of the NDI. Methods Following guidelines provided by the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons, the original English NDI scale was cross-culturally adapted into Hindi. The adaptation process included translations (forward and backward), expert committee review, pre-testing and cognitive debriefing with 30 individuals experiencing chronic non-specific neck pain. The outcome of this process was the creation of the Hindi version of the NDI, termed NDI-Hi. Subsequently, NDI-Hi was administered to 211 participants with neck pain from multiple centers for psychometric testing. The evaluation involved test-retest reliability over a 48-hour interval, factor analysis, assessment of internal reliability measures, and criterion-related validity by comparing it with the NPAD-Hindi version. Results The NDI-Hi version exhibited favorable psychometric properties, including good test-retest reliability with an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87. Internal consistency of the scale was high, indicated by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α) of 0.96. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was determined to be 2.58, and the minimal detectable change (MDC) was calculated to be 7.15. Furthermore, the NDI-Hi showed significant correlation with the NPAD-Hindi version, with a correlation coefficient (rho) of 0.86, and a p-value of less than 0.001. Conclusions The NDI-Hi demonstrated validity and reliability as an outcome tool for assessing neck disability. It can be effectively utilized in clinical practice and research settings involving Hindi-speaking individuals with chronic non-specific neck pain. The adapted scale is particularly well-suited for the rural Northern Indian Hindi-speaking population. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599", "name": "Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck..." } } ] } Home Browse Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Sidiq M, Ramachandran A, Janakiraman B et al. Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Revised Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] Mohammad Sidiq https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2448-8971 1,2 , Arunachalam Ramachandran 1 , Balamurugan Janakiraman https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3866-9351 1,3 , [...] Faizan Zaffar Kashoo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8272-674X 4 , Aksh Chahal 2 , Janvhi Singh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3588-8049 5 , Yousef Almotairi 6 , Abdul Aziz Almotairi 6 , Mohammad Miraj 4 , Sai Jaya Prakash CH https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9546-311X 7 , Krishna Reddy Vajrala https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2810-0909 2 , Ramprasad Muthukrishnan 8 , Praveen Kumar Kandakurti https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2669-4488 8 Mohammad Sidiq https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2448-8971 1,2 , Arunachalam Ramachandran 1 , [...] Balamurugan Janakiraman https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3866-9351 1,3 , Faizan Zaffar Kashoo https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8272-674X 4 , Aksh Chahal 2 , Janvhi Singh https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3588-8049 5 , Yousef Almotairi 6 , Abdul Aziz Almotairi 6 , Mohammad Miraj 4 , Sai Jaya Prakash CH https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9546-311X 7 , Krishna Reddy Vajrala https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2810-0909 2 , Ramprasad Muthukrishnan 8 , Praveen Kumar Kandakurti https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2669-4488 8 PUBLISHED 08 Aug 2024 Author details Author details 1 Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Madhav University, Abu Road Sirohi Rajasthan, 307026, India 2 Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 3 SRM College of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, SRM Institute of Science and Technology (SRMIST), Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, 603203, India 4 Department of Physical Therapy and Health Rehabilitation, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Majmaah University, Al Majmaah, Riyadh Province, 11932, Saudi Arabia 5 Department of Physiotherapy, NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 303121, India 6 Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Northern Area Armed Forces Hospital, Hafar Al Batin, Eastern Province, 31991, Saudi Arabia 7 PDS Institute of Physiotherapy, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad, 506007, India 8 College of Health Sciences, Gulf Medical University, Ajman, Al Jurf, 4184, United Arab Emirates Mohammad Sidiq Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Arunachalam Ramachandran Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Balamurugan Janakiraman Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Faizan Zaffar Kashoo Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Aksh Chahal Roles: Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing Janvhi Singh Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing Yousef Almotairi Roles: Software, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Abdul Aziz Almotairi Roles: Software, Validation Mohammad Miraj Roles: Software, Supervision, Validation Sai Jaya Prakash CH Roles: Data Curation, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Krishna Reddy Vajrala Roles: Investigation, Project Administration, Software Ramprasad Muthukrishnan Roles: Software, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Praveen Kumar Kandakurti Roles: Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Background To ensure the validity and therapeutic utility of the Neck disability index (NDI) scale, translations, cultural adaptations and psychometric evidence is necessary. This study aimed to address the absence of a suitable and validated Hindi version of the NDI for the rural population. The specific objectives were to translate, adapt, and evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Hindi version of the NDI. Methods Following guidelines provided by the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons, the original English NDI scale was cross-culturally adapted into Hindi. The adaptation process included translations (forward and backward), expert committee review, pre-testing and cognitive debriefing with 30 individuals experiencing chronic non-specific neck pain. The outcome of this process was the creation of the Hindi version of the NDI, termed NDI-Hi. Subsequently, NDI-Hi was administered to 211 participants with neck pain from multiple centers for psychometric testing. The evaluation involved test-retest reliability over a 48-hour interval, factor analysis, assessment of internal reliability measures, and criterion-related validity by comparing it with the NPAD-Hindi version. Results The NDI-Hi version exhibited favorable psychometric properties, including good test-retest reliability with an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87. Internal consistency of the scale was high, indicated by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α) of 0.96. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was determined to be 2.58, and the minimal detectable change (MDC) was calculated to be 7.15. Furthermore, the NDI-Hi showed significant correlation with the NPAD-Hindi version, with a correlation coefficient (rho) of 0.86, and a p-value of less than 0.001. Conclusions The NDI-Hi demonstrated validity and reliability as an outcome tool for assessing neck disability. It can be effectively utilized in clinical practice and research settings involving Hindi-speaking individuals with chronic non-specific neck pain. The adapted scale is particularly well-suited for the rural Northern Indian Hindi-speaking population. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Translation, Psychometric testing, Hindi, Neck pain, Neck disability index, Rural India Corresponding Author(s) Praveen Kumar Kandakurti ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Praveen Kumar Kandakurti Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2024 Sidiq M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Sidiq M, Ramachandran A, Janakiraman B et al. Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.2 ) First published: 18 Dec 2023, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.1 ) Latest published: 08 Aug 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.2 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 Here are the major differences between the two versions of the article: 1. Focus and Scope Clarification: The revised version explicitly emphasizes the need for a validated Hindi version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) specifically for the rural population. It underscores the importance of cultural adaptation and psychometric validation to ensure the tool's relevance and reliability in this context. 2. Methodological Details: The revised version provides more detailed methodological steps, adhering closely to guidelines from the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons for cross-cultural adaptation. It outlines the stages of translation, expert review, pre-testing, and cognitive debriefing in greater detail, thereby enhancing transparency and replicability. 3. Participant Details: While both versions mention participant numbers and the general condition (chronic non-specific neck pain), the updated article specifies the demographic focus on rural Hindi-speaking individuals. It highlights the sample size used for both adaptation (30 individuals) and psychometric testing (211 participants from multiple centers), offering a clearer picture of the study's population. 4. Psychometric Results: The revised version provides updated psychometric results, including specific values such as the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87 for test-retest reliability, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α) of 0.96 for internal consistency, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). These details enhance the article's credibility and utility in clinical and research settings. 5. Conclusion and Implications: The conclusions drawn in the revised version are more explicit about the implications of the findings. It emphasizes how the NDI-Hi can improve patient care and research outcomes specifically in rural areas with Hindi-speaking populations, aligning with broader healthcare needs and addressing specific linguistic and cultural barriers. Here are the major differences between the two versions of the article: 1. Focus and Scope Clarification: The revised version explicitly emphasizes the need for a validated Hindi version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) specifically for the rural population. It underscores the importance of cultural adaptation and psychometric validation to ensure the tool's relevance and reliability in this context. 2. Methodological Details: The revised version provides more detailed methodological steps, adhering closely to guidelines from the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeons for cross-cultural adaptation. It outlines the stages of translation, expert review, pre-testing, and cognitive debriefing in greater detail, thereby enhancing transparency and replicability. 3. Participant Details: While both versions mention participant numbers and the general condition (chronic non-specific neck pain), the updated article specifies the demographic focus on rural Hindi-speaking individuals. It highlights the sample size used for both adaptation (30 individuals) and psychometric testing (211 participants from multiple centers), offering a clearer picture of the study's population. 4. Psychometric Results: The revised version provides updated psychometric results, including specific values such as the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.87 for test-retest reliability, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (α) of 0.96 for internal consistency, standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimal detectable change (MDC). These details enhance the article's credibility and utility in clinical and research settings. 5. Conclusion and Implications: The conclusions drawn in the revised version are more explicit about the implications of the findings. It emphasizes how the NDI-Hi can improve patient care and research outcomes specifically in rural areas with Hindi-speaking populations, aligning with broader healthcare needs and addressing specific linguistic and cultural barriers. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Prem Venkatesan See the authors' detailed response to the review by Y. Ravi shankar Reddy READ REVIEWER RESPONSES Introduction Non-specific neck pain is characterized by lack of pathognomonic signs and symptoms ( Bernal-Utrera et al. , 2020 ) and neck pain is the second biggest contributor to the global disability-adjusted life years among musculoskeletal disorders ( Blyth et al. , 2019 ). Around 50% of adults experience neck pain annually, leading to a poorer quality of life ( Safiri et al. , 2017 ). Disability related to neck pain represent a substantial socioeconomic burden ( e.g. , health care utilization, work absenteeism, and lost productivity) ( Manchikanti et al. , 2009 ). In 2016, among the 154 conditions, low back and neck pain had the highest health-care spending in the United States estimated at USD 134.5 billion ( Dieleman et al. , 2020 ). In rural India, the average expenditure on healthcare per family in Indian rupees is INR 3,040.82 per month ( Patil et al. , 2018 ), but musculoskeletal disorders are yet to be included in National Health Policy 2017 ( Gupta & Kumari, 2017 ). Individuals with non-specific neck pain experience of physical ( e.g. , pain and disability) and psychological ( e.g. , anxiety, depression, and fear avoidance beliefs) concerns ( Simula et al. , 2019 ). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used in research and clinical settings to report physical and psychological problems in individuals with neck pain ( Wirth et al. , 2016 ; Lee et al. , 2015 ). The NDI is a reliable, valid, and commonly used PROM to evaluate physical problems (pain and disability) among individuals with neck pain, which has been translated into many different languages like; Turkish ( A. T. V. Study, 2008 ), Brazilian ( Cook et al. , 2006 ), Portuguese ( Cook et al. , 2006 ), German ( Awaji, 2016 ), French, Swedish (though modified) ( Lee et al. , 2006 ), Korean ( Song et al. , 2010 ), Iranian ( Mousavi et al. , 2007 ), Dutch ( Reneman, 2012 ), Greek ( Trouli et al. , 2008 ), Italian ( Monticone et al. , 2012 ), Arabic ( Khair et al. , 2020 ), Japanese ( Nakamaru et al. , 2012 ), Polish ( Misterska et al. , 2011 ), Thai, Punjabi ( Sandal et al. , 2021 ) and Marathi language ( A. M. V. Study, 2015 ). The translation of a commonly used questionnaire facilitates cross-cultural and cross-linguistic comparisons and sharing of findings, as well as comparisons between other groups and clinical trials to ascertain the functional ability of the Indian population suffering from neck pain. Cross-culturally applicable questionnaires need to be linguistically translated to enhance comprehension and culturally appropriated to preserve the tool’s content validity. According to the 2011 National Census of India, of the 1.3 billion Indians living worldwide, approximately 0.322 billion are native speakers of Hindi language. Language barriers are reported to have major impact on the quality of healthcare particularly when the healthcare providers and patients do not share a native language ( Almutairi et al. , 2020 ). Considering the factors like limited healthcare access in rural India, growing burden of musculoskeletal disorders including neck pain, possible language barriers, and the need for an accurate, relevant, and context-specific outcome measure to evaluate the disability among neck pain patients in India ( Principles et al. , n.d. ; Sidiq et al. , 2022 ). In our extensive search, authors found one published work that aimed to translate, adapt and perform test-retest reliability, validity of the Hindi-version of NDI ( Shakil et al. , 2011 ), but the authors reported of not conducting the validity test due to feasibility constraints. We found that the authors of the previous version did not follow steps recommended or guidelines for the process of cross cultural adaptation of self-reported measures ( Beaton et al. , 2000 ) and most of the psychometric properties analysis, dimensionality factor analysis, responsiveness (MDC, Minimal Detectable Change) were are neither performed nor mentioned, living behind a methodological gap that has led to considerably decreased utility of Hindi-version of NDI in research and clinical set up. Further, there is compelling evidence from a review that this published work lacks methodological quality in the process of translation, which implies conduction of further research to develop a reliable, validated, and tested Hindi version of NDI. In addition, the previous version also has no mention of permission from the original author of the NDI tool ( Pellicciari et al. , 2016 ). It is essential to prioritize the efforts of translation and adaptation to understand cultural norms, attitudes, and behaviors with the objective to increase inclusivity in healthcare settings and research. Additionally, it is required that the procedures for the comprehensive psychometric properties study and cross-cultural adaptation of self-reported measures, as advised by consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments, be followed (COSMIN) ( Mokkink et al. , 2010 , 2016 ). As the occurrence of neck pain continues to rise and considering the populous native Hindi speakers, having a well-validated Hindi version of the NDI will enhance its clinical applicability and, most significantly, foster the inclusion of Hindi-speaking individuals suffering from neck pain in rural India but lacking proficiency in the English language. Therefore, this study intended to translate and adapt the original version of NDI into Hindi and assess its psychometric properties among the Hindi-speaking people with chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP). Furthermore, objectives include translating NDI into the Hindi language and testing the Hindi version of the NDI for its reliability and validity and responsiveness among patients with CNSNP. Methods This methodological study used cross-sectional adaptation and validation method approach to develop NDI-Hi version. Permission to develop a new Hindi version among the rural Hindi speaking population was secured from the eprovide MAPI research trust, a non-profit organization based in France, and the copyright holder of the NDI through a signed agreement with the PI (MS). The study adhered to the SAGER guidelines for reporting sex and gender information. Sex and gender differences were not taken into consideration for the design of the study ( Heidari et al. , 2016 ). Ethical approval The translation, adaptation, and psychometric testing of the Hindi version of NDI was performed for the tool requirement of a subsequent registered clinical trial among Hindi speaking rural North Indian population. The present study was phase 1 of the clinical trial and includes a different study population. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Madhav University, Rajasthan (Ref. No: MU/IEC/21/14; dated 24/07/2021), and written informed consent for participation was obtained before patient recruitment. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki. The purposes and the importance of the study were clarified to each participant. Participants were free to refuse to participate or answer any of the questions throughout the course of the study to ensure data confidentiality at all levels of the study, names of participants and any personal identifiers were not included. This study was part of larger trial that was registered prospectively with CTRI/2021/08/036040. Participants This study was conducted at the Physiotherapy outpatient department (OPD) of Sanskriti University Mathura, India and Jeevan Jyoti Hospital Mathura in the Northern State of India (Mathura city, Uttar Pradesh) from August 2021 to June 2022. Hence, the study protocol was presented to the Ethical member at the Madhav University and approval obtained. Further, the Ethical approval letter and the study proposal was submitted to the Clinical Trial Registry of India (Government of India) CTRI, which verified the application and granted permission to conduct the definitive study. The study settings are the associate centers of Madhav University, and proper permission was obtained from the two centers to conduct the study. A total of 220 participants with CNSNP were recruited across two centers, of which 211 participants (114 females and 97 males) completed all participant-reported socio-demographic data, clinical information using face to face interviews as the participants in general visit the study center for consultations and physical rehabilitation, hence we decided to use interview method to improve the quality of data collected. by trained assessors. Neck Disability Index – Hindi version (NDI-Hi) and Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) ( Agarwal & Allison, 2006 ). This study followed recommendations of best practices for developing and validating scales ( R. Article, 2017 ), which suggests at least 5-10 participants per item in the tool as recommended by the COSMIN checklist ( Mokkink et al. , 2010 ). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation ( Arafat & Chowdhury, 2016 ). We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. Inclusion and exclusion criteria Individuals aged 18 years and above, living with CNSNP for > 3 months duration, residing in rural area, who understand and speak Hindi language, and those willing to participate were included in this study. Individuals with acute neck pain, diseases causing neck disability, previous cervical spine injury, prolapsed intervertebral disc disease, traumatic vertebral fractures, neck surgery, clinically recognizable cognitive impairment, pregnancy, and those who could not read and speak Hind were excluded from the study. Individuals with chronic non-specific neck pain visiting the study area primarily for other problems were also excluded. Instruments Neck Disability Index (NDI) The NDI, originally developed by Vernon and Mior ( Vernon & Mior, 1991 ) is a 10-item or section patient-reported outcome measure designed to assess neck pain and pain-related disability. The tool consist of 10 sections designed to self-report on how neck pain impacts the activities of daily life, the domains are; intensity of pain, personal care (dressing, washing), lifting heavy and light weights, reading, headaches, concentration, work, driving, sleeping, and recreation. Each section consists of six activity-based exclusive responses expressing progressive levels of functional disability. Item scores range from 0 (no disability) to 5 (total disability) and Vernon also established categorization of scores as; 0 to 4 no disability, 5 to 14 mild disability, 15 to 24 moderate disability, 25 to 34 severe disability, and ≥ 35 complete disability. The total score is out of 50 ( Vernon & Mior, 1991 ) and is also frequently normalized to 100 and reported as a percentage. The NDI (one-dimensional questionnaire) measures a single construct, and the questionnaire has demonstrated moderate differences in validity and reliability with a different patient population ( Pietrobon et al. , 2002 ). Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) The NPAD scale is a 20-item multi-dimensional questionnaire designed to assess neck pain and disability. The items are scored along a 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS) with the scores ranging from 0 to 5 in VAS. A higher score indicates greater disability. The Hindi version of NPAD has been cross-culturally translated and validated among 64 Indian individuals with cervical radiculopathy. The Hindi version of NPAD has been psychometrically tested and shown to have acceptable internal consistency and validity ( Agarwal & Allison, 2006 ). Translation and cross-cultural adaptation process Tool adaptation and translation was conducted as per the guidelines suggested by Beaton et al. (2000) . The translation and adaptation process for NDI consists of the following steps; forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and synthesis, tool pretesting, and submission and appraisal of the written reports by the translation-adaptation coordinating committee ( Beaton et al. , 2000 ). In step one, forward translation was performed from English to Hindi language by two Hindi native translators (a professional translator and a post-graduate employee working in education department) who were fluent in the English language. One independent translator was blinded to process of forward translation of NDI. This was done to make sure the equivalency from a therapeutic point of view rather than literal equivalence. The other translator was informed about the purpose of the study and the concepts being studied. This was for contemplating the language used by the population and spotlight terms in the original questionnaire, the translation of which might have been obscure. Two forward-translated documents (T1 and T2) were produced. In step two, the independently translated T1 & T2 documents were shared among the two translators to synthesize NDI-Hi (version 1). Any inconsistencies, differences in the concepts and/or meaning, elusive wordings were sorted by discussion and agreement. In step three, the first draft NDI-Hi was back-translated to English language by two bilingual independent translators (native Hindi language speaking teachers with master’s degree in English) and not familiar with the construct being assessed and blinded to the process of forward translation. After discussion and agreement between back translators and the principal investigator (MS), a third translation was performed. In step four, all three documents were presented to the expert panel for review and discussion. The expert committee was comprised of four translators, two review committee experts from the university and two senior physiotherapy academicians who reviewed the Hindi version of the questionnaire. The panel discussed clarity, relevance, modifications, comprehension and synthesized the pre-final version for field testing Figure 1 . Figure 1. Study flowchart. NDI, Neck disability index. Pilot study and modifications In step five, upon approval of the panel, NDI-Hi was piloted on 30 individuals with CNSNP (19 females and 11 males). A cognitive (qualitative) debriefing and the pretest pilot of the pre-final NDI-Hi was conducted to assess; 1. The time taken to complete the tool and clarity of the instructions in the tool (administration). 2. Internal consistency, if the items are logically ordered, necessity of the items in the tool (organization). 3. If the questions are direct, whether the questions are free from technical jargon, cultural appropriateness. As a result, the majority of participants reported a good understanding of the tool. However, 16 participants reported section eight ‘driving’ not applicable to them. Based on cognitive debriefing comments made by the participants, the committee agreed to reword section eight (driving) to fit the cultural context in India where most people do not drive car, rather travel by public and/or private transport and motorbike. For the participants who did not answer/drive, the total score was adjusted from 45 instead of 50 (multiplying 50/45). The final Hindi version of the NDI was then compared with the original one to achieve representational, fact-finding and contextual equivalence. Psychometric testing of the NDI-Hi Psychometric properties were assessed using the final version of the NDI-Hindi ( Sidiq, 2023 ) on 211 patients with CNSNP for > 3 months duration across three centers. The test-retest reliability of the NDI-Hi version was determined by calculating Cronbach’s alpha with an alpha value of > 0.7 (deemed acceptable), > 0.8 (considered good), and > 0.9 (considered excellent) to grade the internal consistency ( Taber, 2018 ). The minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions; item in the scale (k) 10, power 0.90 (1 - β), type I error (α) 0.05, value of Cronbach’s alpha at null hypothesis (CA0) and expected value of Cronbach’s alpha (CA1) were identified at 0.0 and 0.8, respectively ( Bonett, 2002 ). The required sample size was 70. NDI-Hi was re-administered on about 50% of the participants (n = 110) at the interval of 48 hours to assess its test-retest reliability. With a minimum of 2 days between the completions of NDI-Hi, sufficient time should have elapsed to minimize the bias associated with recall of previous responses ( Marx et al. , 2003 ). This is more than the power calculated sample. To determine the dimensionality of the NDI-Hi, a stepwise exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed with Kaiser Meyer Olkin and Bartlett’s criteria with a retention rule of an Eigenvalue > 1 (items with loadings ≥ 0.4 were considered satisfactory). Independent factors were obtained with maximum likelihood using the Varimax rotation model. The floor and ceiling effects, distribution and completeness of items responses and missing values were examined for content validity. The concurrent validity method was used for the criterion-related validity; Pearson’s correlation analysis was done to establish relation between NDI-Hi and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The convergent construct validity was examined by comparing the NDI-Hi and Hindi version of NPAD using Spearman rank correlation coefficient (r). The r value of > 0.80 were considered excellent, and 0.61 to 0.80 very good. It is expected that the Hindi versions of NDI and NPAD would have moderate correlations since both tools measures the impact of neck pain on the functional status of the patients ( Agarwal et al. , 2006 ). Standard error of measurement (SEM) was calculated from the square root (SEM = SD √ (1-R)) of the within-subject variance from ANOVA for random-effect to evaluate the measurement error. MDC 95% was derived using the SEM to allow expression of the smallest magnitude of change that reveals the true change rather than measurement error by using the formula MDC 95% = 1.96 √2x SEM or 2.7*SEM. The Bland-Altman plot was also used to determine agreement ( Bland & Giavarina, 2015 ) ( Figure 2 ). Figure 2. Bland-Altman plot of agreement between test and re-test scores of NDI-Hi. Bold blue line representing the mean of difference, the red lines representing 95% LOA and the grey lines representing the 95% CI of the mean of the difference. NDI-Hi, Hindi-version of the Neck disability index; LOA, limits of agreement. Statistical analysis IBM SPSS Statistics (RRID: SCR_016479) version 20 was used to analyze the data (SPSS 20, IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). Characteristics and observations of the quantitative and qualitative variables were summed using the mean, standard deviation (SD) and frequencies or relative frequencies. Normality of scores from different instruments was examined using one-sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and convergent validity of the two scales used in the analysis were examined. The raw score of the NDI was transformed to 100 prior to psychometric testing of the tool. Authors in the present study were able to determine the internal consistency of the NDI-Hindi using Cronbach’s alpha index with values between 0.70 and 0.90 considered satisfactory. For test-retest reliability, interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and 95 percent confidence intervals (CIs) were determined. ICCs below 0.40 were considered low, those in the range of 0.4-0.70 were considered moderate, 0.70-0.90 was considered significant and values above 0.9 were considered exceptional respectively. The degree of correlation between NDI-Hindi and the NPAD at baseline was determined using Spearman’s rho correlation. The significance level was set at P 1, and Kaiser Meyer Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test of sphericity, the dimensionality of the NDI-Hi was ascertained. The Maximum Likelihood with a Varimax rotation model was used for the EFA of the Hindi version of NDI, and the 0.4-factor loading principle was used for extraction ( Zhang, 2015 ). Results Participants Demographic variables of the participants have been tabulated in Table 1 ( Sidiq et al. , 2023 ). All participants were assessed for their body mass index, duration of neck pain, pain medication, associated medical condition, marital status, employment status, level of education, income and mean and SD scores of NDI and NPAD. The majority of participants were female (n = 149, 70.6%), married (n = 152, 72.0%) and unemployed (n = 120, 56.9%). Near about 80% of the participants reported living with neck pain for 6 months and more. Table 1. Socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of participants with CNNP for psychometric testing (n = 211). Variables n (%) Mean (SD) Age (years) 40.6 ± 10.5 Sex Male 62 (29.4) Female 149 (70.6) Education No formal schooling 18 (8.5) Primary 20 (9.5) Secondary 49 (23.2) Diploma/Skill trainings 34 (16.1) University level 90 (42.7) Duration of pain (months) 17.7 ± 18.1 1 year 76 (36.0) 1 st assessment NDI-Hi (0-50) 38.5 ± 5.6 VAS (0-10) 2 nd assessment (n = 110) NDI-Hi (0-50) 39.1 ± 5.2 VAS (0-10) Mean difference test-retest (n = 110) NDI-Hi (0-50) 0.6 ± 3.8 VAS (0-10) Participant’s response to NDI-Hi Table 2 displays the mean scores extracted from the participants in 10 sections of the NDI-Hindi. Participants were moderately affected due to neck disorder and the mean rating on NDI was 32.02 (6.9) out of 50 in total. Principle component analysis revealed two-factor structures (physical dysfunction and neurological dysfunction) of NDI-Hindi. The physical dysfunction included pain intensity personal care, lifting, work, driving, reading and recreation were moderately to severely affected with a mean score ranging from 3.36-3.92, while neurological dysfunction that included headaches, concentration and sleeping were mildly affected with mean scores 2.3 and standard deviation of 0.6. Table 2. Reliability (n = 211) of the NDI-Hi, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and SEM (n = 110). NDI domains (items) T1 NDI-Hi mean ± SD T2 NDI-Hi mean ± SD ICC (95% CI) (n = 110) SEM MDC 95% Pain Intensity * 4.1 ± 1.0 4.2 ± 0.9 0.84 0.36 1.00 Personal Care ** 3.8 ± 0.4 3.8 ± 0.4 0.885 0.13 0.35 Lifting ** 3.9 ± 0.9 4.0 ± 1.0 0.917 0.29 0.81 Reading ** 3.9 ± 0.9 4.0 ± 0.6 0.896 0.19 0.52 Headaches * 3.7 ± 0.6 3.8 ± 0.9 0.845 0.35 0.98 Concentration * 3.8 ± 0.9 3.8 ± 0.3 0.845 0.15 0.41 Work * 3.7 ± 0.5 3.8 ± 0.8 0.845 0.35 0.98 Driving * 3.8 ± 0.9 3.9 ± 0.7 0.869 0.25 0.69 Sleeping ** 3.9 ± 0.9 4.0 ± 1.0 0.881 0.34 0.96 Recreation ** 3.6 ± 0.4 3.7 ± 0.5 0.873 0.17 0.47 Total Score (50) 38.5 39.1 0.87 2.58 7.15 * Indicates <0.05. ** Indicates <0.01. Internal consistency of the NDI-Hi The Cronbach’s alpha reliability was 0.962, which indicated that respondents were able to read and comprehend the 10 NDI-Hindi items well. However, all 10 indicators demonstrated a meaningful adjusted total association with their total scores. When these indicators were removed from the total, all of the items exhibited a corrected item-total correlation greater than 0.75, showing reasonably substantial shared covariance ( Table 3 ). Test-retest reliability of NDI Hi Test-retest reliability was assessed seven days after the initial assessment and was found to be excellent. The test-retest reliability was excellent for the overall NDI-Hindi and average Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.893, with a 95% Confidence interval (CI) (0.795, 0.937) (p < 0.001) ( Table 2 ). The mean of item variances was 0.648, with inter-item covariance’s mean of 0.465 ( Table 3 ). Table 3. Internal consistency of the NDI-Hi if item deleted (n = 211). Item - Total Statistics Items in NDI Scale Mean if Item Deleted Scale Variance if Item Deleted Corrected Item-Total Correlation Cronbach’s Alpha if Item Deleted Pain Intensity 28.6 39.01 0.80 0.95 Personal Care 28.6 40.7 0.85 0.95 Lifting 28.4 37.1 0.92 0.95 Work 28.6 40.3 0.93 0.95 Headaches 29.6 40.8 0.82 0.95 Concentration 29.6 40.8 0.82 0.95 Sleeping 29.6 40.8 0.82 0.95 Driving 28.3 37.7 0.86 0.95 Reading 28.3 36.1 0.85 0.95 Recreation 28.1 39.1 0.75 0.96 Construct validity of NDI-Hi Construct validity of the NDI-Hindi was estimated using principal component analysis (factor analysis) with varimax rotation ( Table 4 ). Data met the assumptions (Kaiser–Meyer Olkin = 0.826) of sample adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. The total variance explained by two factors was 87.5%. The analysis found a two factor structure of scale; Factor 1 included the first seven items of the questionnaire (77.3% of variance), Factor 2 included three items (10.2% of variance) ( Table 5 ). Factor loading was determined using a scree plot ( Figure 3 ). Table 4. Construct validity of NDI-Hi. NDI Items Pain Intensity Personal Care Lifting Work Headaches Concentration Sleeping Driving Reading Pain Intensity Personal Care 0.760 ** Lifting 0.898 ** 0.917 ** Work 0.771 ** 0.931 ** 0.922 ** Headaches 0.655 ** 0.722 ** 0.742 ** 0.783 ** Concentration 0.655 ** 0.722 ** 0.742 ** 0.783 ** 1.000 ** Sleeping 0.655 ** 0.722 ** 0.742 ** 0.783 ** 1.000 ** 1.000 ** Driving 0.857 ** 0.843 ** 0.934 ** 0.839 ** 0.663 ** 0.663 ** 0.663 ** Reading 0.703 ** 0.880 ** 0.906 ** 0.957 ** 0.764 ** 0.764 ** 0.764 ** 0.833 ** Recreation 0.768 ** 0.771 ** 0.777 ** 0.814 ** 0.695 ** 0.695 ** 0.695 ** 0.655 ** 0.772 ** ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Table 5. Principle factor analysis for two components on the Varimax rotation for the NDI-Hi. Items of NDI Component Physical Dysfunction Neurological Dysfunction Lifting 0.910 Driving 0.904 Pain Intensity 0.850 Personal Care 0.811 Work 0.788 Reading 0.735 Concentration 0.921 Sleeping 0.921 Headaches 0.921 Figure 3. Scree plot indicating factor loading for NDI-Hi. NDI-Hi, Hindi-version of the Neck disability index. Convergent validity of NDI-Hi The scores of NDI-Hindi showed excellent correlation with the total scores on Hindi-validated version of NPAD scale. Scores on neck pain and disability scale showed a significant positive correlation with all 10 items of NDI, with the highest correlation with lifting item (0.917, p = 001) and a least but significant correlation with the concentration item and sleeping (0.845, p = 0.001) ( Table 6 ). Table 6. Spearman's rho correlations of the NDI-Hi with the sub scales of NPAD. NDI items Neck Pain and Disability Scale Pain Intensity 0.840 ** Personal Care 0.885 ** Lifting 0.917 ** Work 0.896 ** Headaches 0.845 ** Concentration 0.845 ** Sleeping 0.845 ** Driving 0.869 ** Reading 0.881 ** Recreation 0.873 ** ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). * Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). Discussion This study aimed to translate and adapt the original English version of NDI into the national language of India (Hindi) and test the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi version. Specifically, this study aimed to address the methodological gap of the previous Hindi version of the NDI ( Hung et al. , 2014 ; Patel, 2012 ; Pellicciari et al. , 2016 ) with improved statistical estimation using the recommended best practices for developing and validating scales. The previous study which aimed to adapt, test-retest the reliability, and validate the Hindi version of NDI demonstrated methodological shortcomings like non-reproducible methods, and not complying with the required translation steps for cross-cultural validity. The published version of the previous article reported only findings about the internal consistency (α 0.995), and test re-test reliability (ICC, 0.99). Further, it noteworthy that the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation ( Hung et al. , 2014 ). Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study. The recommended guidelines were followed during translation and adaptations ( Beaton et al. , 2000 ). The translation, adaptation, and synthesis of NDI-Hi was easy and accepted by the Hindi speaking people with CNSNP. Overall findings from this study indicate NDI-Hi to be a reliable and valid patient-reported outcome measure that could be used by researchers and clinicians to assess disability and functional limitations caused by neck pain among the Hindi-speaking population who are unable to read or write in the English language. NDI-Hi demonstrated excellent internal consistency and Cronbach α of 0.89, which is comparable to the reports of previous works (0.74–0.97) and explains sample adequacy ( Wu et al. , 2010 ). In this study, the time interval for the test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient’s clinical condition and minimal memory-related effects ( Marx et al. , 2003 ). Likewise, NDI-Hi also showed good internal consistency, indicating good reliability. The acceptability of the NDI-Hi showed that all the items were below the threshold recommended for floor effects (20%). However, the ceiling effect of the pain intensity was found to be marginally (21.6%) higher than the threshold recommended. Similarly, previous studies reported no floor or ceiling effects with the only exception being the intensity of pain ( Nakamaru et al. , 2012 ; Shashua et al. , 2016 ; Trouli et al. , 2008 ; Farooq et al. , 2017 ). Though this phenomenon is not unique, a study on the Malay version of NDI reported moderate responsiveness of pain intensity and also explains the complexity in quantifying pain ( Lim et al. , 2020 ). In our study, the pilot test conducted to check the feasibility and acceptability of the translated NDI-Hi version found that the majority of participants were not responding to the item on driving and the same was discussed in the cognitive debriefing. In India, the majority of individuals travel using motorbikes, public transportation, and private vehicles, with a relatively small portion choosing to commute by car. Moreover, when section eight, which pertains to driving, is culturally adapted to encompass driving, riding, or traveling, it significantly enhances the responses to this section, reducing the occurrence of missing values related to driving in various studies ( Cook et al. , 2006 ; Lee et al. , 2006 ). SEM (< 0.4) and MDC 95% of the NDI-Hi version indicated an absolute reliability and genuine agreement of repeated measurements, and suitability of NDI-Hi for clinical and research uses. MDC 95% of 7.15 (score range 0-50) will guide clinicians and researchers of true change in NDI-Hi scores. Scores at or above MDC value indicate meaningful clinical change in patients. MDC value of NDI-Hi is comparable to the values reported by other researchers and smaller (precise) than other studies ( Pool et al. , 2007 ; Young et al. , 2009 ; Trouli et al. , 2008 ; Farooq et al. , 2017 ; Maki et al. , 2014 ; Shashua et al. , 2016 ). The smallest detectable change (SDC) and minimally important difference (MIC) reported by the Dutch version was 11.5, and 31.7 respectively, the Italian version NDI showed MIC of 10, and a methodological review conducted including 19 NDI versions reported only these three versions of NDI mentioned MIC ( Yao et al. , 2019 ). The MDC reported in this study is 7.15, which is relatively lower than MDC reported elsewhere, and this is suggestive that even a smaller change in the Hindi version of NDI shall be considered as an important yardstick of clinical relevant hence, offers a sensitive outcome tool even in case of less powered sample or individual level studies. The validity of NDI-Hi was conducted by qualitative cognitive debriefing to establish content validity and correlation test of the scale with the NPAD Hindi version to evaluate the construct convergent validity ( Brod et al. , 2009 ). Based on the pilot study and cognitive briefing, rewording of item eight was done, which improved the understanding, acceptance and response rate. Factor analyses resulted in a hypothesized 2-factor solution for NDI-Hi represented as physical dysfunctions and neurological dysfunctions. These factors explained 69.51% of the total variance, and the variance reported was comparable to some previous studies ( Nakamaru et al. , 2012 ). The Hindi versions of NDI and NPAD appear to measure a similar construct. The NDI is a condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) and it is frequently used in researches exploring intervention efficacy among individuals with neck pain. Similarly, psychometric properties of NDI-Hi propose it as a suitable PROM for Hindi-speaking individuals with neck pain. Nonetheless, suitability of NDI in patients with whiplash injury, social and emotional is questioned by Hoving et al. , highlighting limitation of the NDI that lacks elements to address these problems ( Hoving et al. , 2003 ). The prospects of implication of the NDI-Hi include; improved reporting of disability related to neck pain among the most populous Hindi speaking Indian people. Improve the use of the new NDI-Hi in the clinical set-up to assess and track the changes related to self-reported disability among chronic neck pain patients. Study limitations This study recruited samples beyond the recommended guidelines for cross-cultural adaptations of outcome measures and the required power calculated sample for test-retest reliability, which improved the statistical power of the psychometric evaluation of the NDI-HI version. However, there are few limitations to mention; this study is a cross-sectional design and hence any correlations should not be interpreted as causal effects. This study used only a self-reported questionnaire, the relationship between the activity limitations of neck pain (NDI) and physical tests were not considered and the study was done among rural northern Indian population only. Conclusions The English version of NDI was successfully adapted to suit the rural Indian cultural context and translated to the Hindi-India version. The Hindi version of the NDI-Hi tool has healthy psychometric properties and appears to be suitable for use in epidemiological studies and clinical trials among Hindi language speakers. The key feature of the NDI-Hi being its content related to rural people and culture specific and the new NDI-Hi version promises to be a comprehensive tool for measuring disability among rural Hindi speaking people. Data availability Underlying data Figshare: NDI DATA SET. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24354952 ( Sidiq et al. , 2023 ). Reporting guidelines Figshare: COSMIN checklist for ‘Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: a cross cultural study’. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.24126609 ( Sidiq, 2023 ). Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC-BY 4.0). Authors’ contributions Conception and design was presented by: MS, AR, Acquisition of Data: BJ, JS, PCH, Analysis: BJ, FK, PK. MS, AR, BJ, and FK drafted the work, AC, PK, AR, YA, SPC, RM, PK and AAAM, JS did critical revision and all authors gave final approval to the version to be published. Authors agree that all aspects of the work or any questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the word are appropriately investigated and resolved. Acknowledgments The authors thank Dr. Howard Vernon and MAPI Trsut for granting permission to use and culturally adapt to the rural Indian population and assisting to translate the Neck Disability Index into Hindi-India version. Our gratitude and appreciation to all the data collectors and participants of this study. References Agarwal S, Allison GT: Reliability and validity of the Hindi version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale in cervical radiculopathy patients.2006. June 2014. Publisher Full Text Agarwal S, Allison GT, Agarwal A, et al. : Reliability and validity of the Hindi version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale in cervical radiculopathy patients. Disabil. Rehabil. 2006; 28 (22): 1405–1411. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Almutairi AG, Al Mashrafi S , Kalbani TA: Implications of Language Barriers for Healthcare: A Systematic Review. Oman Med. J. 2020; 35 (2): e122. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Arafat SMY, Chowdhury R: Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of research instruments: A methodological review. J. Behav. Health. 2016; 5 (3). Publisher Full Text Article R: Guidelines for developing, translating, and validating a questionnaire in perioperative and pain medicine. SJA; 2017. Publisher Full Text Awaji M: Epidemiology of Low Back Pain in Saudi Arabia. J. Adv. Med. Pharm. Sci. 2016; 6 (4): 1–9. Publisher Full Text Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, et al. : Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine. December 15, 2000; 25 (24): 3186–3191. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Bernal-Utrera C, Gonzalez-Gerez JJ, Anarte-Lazo E, et al. : Manual therapy versus therapeutic exercise in non-specific chronic neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020; 21 (1): 1–10. Publisher Full Text Bland U, Giavarina D: Lessons in biostatistics.2015; 25 (2): 141–151. Blyth FM, Briggs AM, Schneider CH, et al. : The Global Burden of Musculoskeletal Pain — Where to From Here? AJPH. 2019; 109 (1): 35–40. Publisher Full Text Bonett DG: Sample Size Requirements for Testing and Estimating Coefficient Alpha. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 2002; 27 (4): 335–340. Publisher Full Text Brod M, Tesler LE, Christensen TL: Qualitative research and content validity: Developing best practices based on science and experience. Qual. Life Res. 2009; 18 (9): 1263–1278. Publisher Full Text Cook C, Richardson JK, Braga L, et al. : Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Neck Disability Index and Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine. 2006; 31 (14): 1621–1627. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Dieleman JL, Cao J, Chapin A, et al. : US Health Care Spending by Payer and Health Condition, 1996-2016. JAMA. 2020; 323 (9): 863–884. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Farooq MN, Mohseni-Bandpei MA, Gilani SA, et al. : Urdu version of the neck disability index: A reliability and validity study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2017; 18 (1): 1–11. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Gupta RK, Kumari R: National health policy 2017: an overview. JK Science. 2017 Jul 1; 19 (3): 135–136. Heidari S, Babor TF, De Castro P, et al. : Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res. Integr. Peer Rev. 2016; 1 (1): 1–9. Publisher Full Text Hoving JL, O’Leary EF, Niere KR, et al. : Validity of the neck disability index, Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire, and problem elicitation technique for measuring disability associated with whiplash-associated disorders. Pain. 2003; 102 (3): 273–281. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, et al. : Challenging the Norm: Further Psychometric Investigation of the Neck Disability Index SC. Spine J. 2014; 15 : 2440–2445. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Khair U, Shahid W, Arshad N, et al. : Prevalence of nonspecific neck pain in dental practitioners of Lahore: A cross Prevalence of nonspecific neck pain in dental practitioners of Lahore: A cross sectional study.2020 May. Lee H, Hübscher M, Moseley GL, et al. : How does pain lead to disability? A systematic review and meta-analysis of mediation studies in people with back and neck pain. Pain. 2015; 156 : 988–997. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Lee H, Nicholson LL, Adams RD, et al. : Development and psychometric testing of Korean language versions of 4 neck pain and disability questionnaires. Spine. 2006; 31 (16): 1841–1845. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Lim HHR, Tan ST, Tang ZY, et al. : Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation of the Malay version of the Neck Disability Index. Disabil. Rehabil. 2020; 1–7. Publisher Full Text Maki D, Rajab E, Watson PJ, et al. : Cross-cultural translation, adaptation, and psychometric testing of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire into modern standard Arabic. Spine. 2014; 39 (25): E1537–E1544. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Manchikanti L, Singh V, Datta S, et al. : Comprehensive review of epidemiology, scope, and impact of spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2009; 12 (4): E35–E70. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, et al. : A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2003; 56 : 730–735. Publisher Full Text Misterska E, Jankowski R, Glowacki M: Cross-cultural adaptation of the Neck Disability Index and Copenhagen Neck Functional Disability Scale for patients with neck pain due to degenerative and discopathic disorders. Psychometric properties of the Polish versions. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2011; 12 (1): 84. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Bouter LM, et al. : The COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) and how to select an outcome measurement instrument. Braz. J. Phys. Ther. 2016; 20 (2): 105–113. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, et al. : The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content.2010. Monticone M, Ferrante S, Vernon H, et al. : Development of the Italian Version of the Neck Disability Index.2012; 37 (17). Publisher Full Text Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Montazeri A, et al. : Translation and Validation Study of the Iranian Versions of the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine. 2007; 32 (26): 825–831. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Nakamaru K, Vernon H, Aizawa J, et al. : Crosscultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Japanese version of the Neck Disability Index. Spine. 2012; 37 (21): E1343–E1347. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Patil SA, Kadam YR, Mane AS, et al. : The Prevalence and Health Impact of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Farmers. Med. J. Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth. Nov–Dec 2018; 11 (6): 485–491. Publisher Full Text Patel R: The impact of physiotherapy on rehabilitation. Indian J. Physiother. Occup. Ther. 2012; 8 (3): 123–130. www.ijpot.com Pellicciari L, Bonetti F, Di Foggia D, et al. : Patient-reported outcome measures for non-specific neck pain validated in the Italian-language: a systematic review. Arch. Physiother. 2016; 6 (1): 9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Pietrobon R, Coeytaux RR, Carey TS, et al. : Standard scales for measurement of functional outcome for cervical pain or dysfunction: A systematic review. Spine. 2002; 27 (5): 515–522. Publisher Full Text Pool JJM, Ostelo RWJG, Hoving JL, et al. : Minimal clinically important change of the neck disability index and the numerical rating scale for patients with neck pain. Spine. 2007; 32 (26): 3047–3051. Publisher Full Text Principles KP, Goals SQ, Thrust P, et al. : NATIONAL HEALTH POLICY. n.d.; 2017. Reneman MF: Neck Pain and Disability Scale and Neck Disability Index: validity of Dutch language versions.2012; 93–100. Publisher Full Text Safiri S, Kolahi A, Hoy D, et al. : Global, regional, and national burden of neck pain in the general population, 1990-2017: systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. BMJ. 2017; 368 . PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Sandal D, Jindal R, Gupta S, et al. : Reliability and Validity of Cross Culturally Adapted Punjabi Version of NDI (NDI-P) in Patients with Neck Pain: A Psychometric Analysis. Indian J. Orthop. 2021; 55 (4): 918–924. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Shakil H, Khan SA, Thakur PC: Test retest reliability and validity of Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in patients with neck pain. Indian J. Physiother. Occup. Ther. 2011; 5 : 167–169. Shashua A, Geva Y, Levran I: Translation, validation, and crosscultural adaptation of the Hebrew version of the neck disability index. Spine. 2016; 41 (12): 1036–1040. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Sidiq M: COSMIN checklist (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments). [Dataset]. figshare. 2023. Publisher Full Text Sidiq M, Ramachandran A, Kashoo FZ, et al. : Prevalence of chronic non-specific neck pain and its associated risk factors among adults in Mathura. NeuroQuantology. 2022; 20 (August): 3210–3219. Publisher Full Text Simula AS, Jenkins HJ, Holopainen R, et al. : Transcultural adaption and preliminary evaluation of “understanding low back pain” patient education booklet. BMC Health Serv. Res. 2019; 19 (1): 1010–1011. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Song K, Choi B, Choi B: Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Korean Version of the Neck Disability Index. Spine. 2010; 35 (20): 1045–1049. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Study, A. M. V: Cultural Adaptation, Reliability, and Validity of Neck Disability Index in Indian Rural Population. Spine. 2015; 40 (2). Publisher Full Text Study, A. T. V: The Cultural Adaptation, Reliability and Validity of Neck Disability Index in Patients With Neck Pain. Spine. 2008; 33 (11): 362–365. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Taber KS: The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Res. Sci. Educ. 2018; 48 (6): 1273–1296. Publisher Full Text Trouli MN, Vernon HT, Kakavelakis KN, et al. : Translation of the Neck Disability Index and validation of the Greek version in a sample of neck pain patients. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2008; 9 : 1–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Vernon H, Mior S: The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J. Manip. Physiol. Ther. 1991; 14 (7): 409–415. Wirth B, Humphreys BK, Peterson C: Importance of psychological factors for the recovery from a first episode of acute non-specific neck pain - a longitudinal observational study. Chiropr. Man. Therap. 2016; 24 (1): 9–10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Wu S, Ma C, Mai M, et al. : Translation and validation study of Chinese versions of the neck disability index and the neck pain and disability scale. Spine. 2010; 35 (16): 1575–1579. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Yao M, Xu B, Tian Z, et al. : PT US CR. Spine J. 2019. Publisher Full Text Young BA, Walker MJ, Strunce JB, et al. : Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index in patients with mechanical neck disorders. Spine J. 2009; 9 (10): 802–808. Publisher Full Text Zhang G: Factor Rotation and Standard Errors in Exploratory Factor Analysis. J. Educ. Behav. Stat. 2015; 40 (6): 579–603. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Dec 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Madhav University, Abu Road Sirohi Rajasthan, 307026, India 2 Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 3 SRM College of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, SRM Institute of Science and Technology (SRMIST), Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, 603203, India 4 Department of Physical Therapy and Health Rehabilitation, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Majmaah University, Al Majmaah, Riyadh Province, 11932, Saudi Arabia 5 Department of Physiotherapy, NIMS University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, 303121, India 6 Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Northern Area Armed Forces Hospital, Hafar Al Batin, Eastern Province, 31991, Saudi Arabia 7 PDS Institute of Physiotherapy, Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad, 506007, India 8 College of Health Sciences, Gulf Medical University, Ajman, Al Jurf, 4184, United Arab Emirates Mohammad Sidiq Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Arunachalam Ramachandran Roles: Conceptualization, Investigation, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Balamurugan Janakiraman Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Faizan Zaffar Kashoo Roles: Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation Aksh Chahal Roles: Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing Janvhi Singh Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Project Administration, Writing – Review & Editing Yousef Almotairi Roles: Software, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Abdul Aziz Almotairi Roles: Software, Validation Mohammad Miraj Roles: Software, Supervision, Validation Sai Jaya Prakash CH Roles: Data Curation, Resources, Software, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Krishna Reddy Vajrala Roles: Investigation, Project Administration, Software Ramprasad Muthukrishnan Roles: Software, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Praveen Kumar Kandakurti Roles: Formal Analysis, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 08 Aug 2024, 12:1599 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.2 version 1 Published: 18 Dec 2023, 12:1599 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.1 Copyright © 2024 Sidiq M et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Sidiq M, Ramachandran A, Janakiraman B et al. Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.142451.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 08 Aug 2024 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Venkatesan P. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312341 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312341 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 12 Sep 2024 Prem Venkatesan , Manipal College of Health Professions, Bangalore, India Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312341 Authors addressed the queries ... Continue reading READ ALL Authors addressed the queries raised and modified appropriately. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My area of expertise is musculoskeletal pain and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Venkatesan P. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312341 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312341 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Reddy YRs. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312340 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312340 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 23 Aug 2024 Y. Ravi shankar Reddy , Department of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Aseer Province, Saudi Arabia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312340 The authors have thoroughly and successfully addressed the concerns raised, leading to a significant improvement in the ... Continue reading READ ALL The authors have thoroughly and successfully addressed the concerns raised, leading to a significant improvement in the manuscript's overall quality. Therefore, I am pleased to recommend that the manuscript be imdexed in its current form. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Reddy YRs. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312340 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312340 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 24 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 24 Aug 2024 Author Response Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 24 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 24 Aug 2024 Author Response Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 18 Dec 2023 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Reddy YRs. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291969 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291969 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 11 Jul 2024 Y. Ravi shankar Reddy , Department of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Aseer Province, Saudi Arabia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291969 Reviewer's Report Title: Adaption and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hindi Version of Neck Disability Index in the Rural Population of Northern India: A Cross-Cultural Study Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview ... Continue reading READ ALL Reviewer's Report Title: Adaption and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hindi Version of Neck Disability Index in the Rural Population of Northern India: A Cross-Cultural Study Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Reddy YRs. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291969 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291969 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 08 Aug 2024 Author Response Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, ... Continue reading Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 2 comment Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. Authors’ response The background section of the abstract is revised accordingly. Reviewer 2 comment The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are made according to the suggestions Reviewer 2 comment Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Authors’ response Thank you, amendments related to language barriers, and the need for a clear context related outcome measures is emphasized. Reviewer 2 comment Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Authors’ response Thank you, we have included a new figure 1 based on the suggestions- to clearly explain the steps into sub-sections. The rationale for using 48 hours interval for test retest reliability is now included with reference and a new flowchart added (figure 1). Details regarding factor analysis is now added under the statistical analysis section. Reviewer 2 comment Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Authors’ response We have added contents to explain the significance of findings. Reviewer 2 comment Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have now included statements related to the previous version of NDI and clinical implication related contents in discussion section. Reviewer 2 comment Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have amended changes accordingly. Regards, Thank you Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 2 comment Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. Authors’ response The background section of the abstract is revised accordingly. Reviewer 2 comment The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are made according to the suggestions Reviewer 2 comment Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Authors’ response Thank you, amendments related to language barriers, and the need for a clear context related outcome measures is emphasized. Reviewer 2 comment Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Authors’ response Thank you, we have included a new figure 1 based on the suggestions- to clearly explain the steps into sub-sections. The rationale for using 48 hours interval for test retest reliability is now included with reference and a new flowchart added (figure 1). Details regarding factor analysis is now added under the statistical analysis section. Reviewer 2 comment Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Authors’ response We have added contents to explain the significance of findings. Reviewer 2 comment Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have now included statements related to the previous version of NDI and clinical implication related contents in discussion section. Reviewer 2 comment Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have amended changes accordingly. Regards, Thank you Competing Interests: None Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 08 Aug 2024 Author Response Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, ... Continue reading Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 2 comment Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. Authors’ response The background section of the abstract is revised accordingly. Reviewer 2 comment The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are made according to the suggestions Reviewer 2 comment Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Authors’ response Thank you, amendments related to language barriers, and the need for a clear context related outcome measures is emphasized. Reviewer 2 comment Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Authors’ response Thank you, we have included a new figure 1 based on the suggestions- to clearly explain the steps into sub-sections. The rationale for using 48 hours interval for test retest reliability is now included with reference and a new flowchart added (figure 1). Details regarding factor analysis is now added under the statistical analysis section. Reviewer 2 comment Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Authors’ response We have added contents to explain the significance of findings. Reviewer 2 comment Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have now included statements related to the previous version of NDI and clinical implication related contents in discussion section. Reviewer 2 comment Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have amended changes accordingly. Regards, Thank you Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 2 comment Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. Authors’ response The background section of the abstract is revised accordingly. Reviewer 2 comment The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are made according to the suggestions Reviewer 2 comment Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Authors’ response Thank you, amendments related to language barriers, and the need for a clear context related outcome measures is emphasized. Reviewer 2 comment Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Authors’ response Thank you, we have included a new figure 1 based on the suggestions- to clearly explain the steps into sub-sections. The rationale for using 48 hours interval for test retest reliability is now included with reference and a new flowchart added (figure 1). Details regarding factor analysis is now added under the statistical analysis section. Reviewer 2 comment Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Authors’ response We have added contents to explain the significance of findings. Reviewer 2 comment Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have now included statements related to the previous version of NDI and clinical implication related contents in discussion section. Reviewer 2 comment Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have amended changes accordingly. Regards, Thank you Competing Interests: None Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Venkatesan P. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291968 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291968 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 05 Jul 2024 Prem Venkatesan , Manipal College of Health Professions, Bangalore, India Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291968 Dear Editor, Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review the manuscript titled: “Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study” ... Continue reading READ ALL Dear Editor, Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review the manuscript titled: “Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study” I have a few concerns about this manuscript: Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. General Comments The manuscript needs language editing and grammatical correction. There is a lack of coherence and cohesion throughout the text. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: My area of expertise is musculoskeletal pain and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Venkatesan P. Reviewer Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291968 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291968 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 08 Aug 2024 Author Response Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, ... Continue reading Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 1 comment Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way. The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are amended in the background section accordingly. We recruited n = 30 individuals for cognitive debriefing & n = 211 for the psychometric testing. Both samples are now mentioned in methods section of abstract (lines 43 - 44) and manuscript (methods-participant sub-section – lines 146-147). (Methods, Inclusion and exclusion criteria-Subsection; lines 156 -164). Reviewer 1 comment Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Authors’ response The changes are now amended in the introduction section to improve the cohesion and lead towards the need for the study. (Introduction section, page 4 lines 89 – 95, lines 120 -126) The reference is now modified accordingly. Reviewer 1 comment Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Authors’ response Thank you, as per the suggestion we have removed the observational study design. And amended changes related to the methods used (methods, lines 135-136). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. (Methods section, lines 165 -171). A total of 220 respondent consented and 9 participants either did not complete the questionnaire or the data sheet was not complete. The figure 1 is changed now accordingly Thank you for the suggestion, we have amended the changes accordingly (Methods section; lines 262 -265) “test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient's clinical condit110ion and minimal memory-related effects(Marx et al., 2003).Yes, considering the difficulty and constraints (response rate) in inviting the respondents to attend face to face interview prospectively for the 2 nd time, we used the recommended “minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions” . Hence, test-retest was conducted using n = 110. The same was prospectively informed and approved by the MAPI Research Trust. Thank you for pointing out, we have removed the statement now. The purpose of Pilot study and cognitive debriefing is now mentioned in the method section (lines 235 -242). Reviewer 1 comment Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Authors’ response Changes done accordingly, thank you Reviewer 1 comment Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. Authors’ response Yes, thank you for reminding us of our primary purpose of addressing the methodological gap of previous work. We have now amended the changes and added content according to your valid suggestions. (Discussion section, lines 353 – 364) “ it is important to the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation. Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study”. Reference; Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, Franklin JD, Lawrence BD, et al. Challenging the norm: further psychometric investigation of the Neck Disability Index. Spine J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.027. And, the same is mentioned as well. Please suggest us if the content added is justifying. Thank you again for pointing out. Reviewer 1 comment References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. Authors’ response Done accordingly Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 1 comment Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way. The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are amended in the background section accordingly. We recruited n = 30 individuals for cognitive debriefing & n = 211 for the psychometric testing. Both samples are now mentioned in methods section of abstract (lines 43 - 44) and manuscript (methods-participant sub-section – lines 146-147). (Methods, Inclusion and exclusion criteria-Subsection; lines 156 -164). Reviewer 1 comment Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Authors’ response The changes are now amended in the introduction section to improve the cohesion and lead towards the need for the study. (Introduction section, page 4 lines 89 – 95, lines 120 -126) The reference is now modified accordingly. Reviewer 1 comment Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Authors’ response Thank you, as per the suggestion we have removed the observational study design. And amended changes related to the methods used (methods, lines 135-136). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. (Methods section, lines 165 -171). A total of 220 respondent consented and 9 participants either did not complete the questionnaire or the data sheet was not complete. The figure 1 is changed now accordingly Thank you for the suggestion, we have amended the changes accordingly (Methods section; lines 262 -265) “test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient's clinical condit110ion and minimal memory-related effects(Marx et al., 2003).Yes, considering the difficulty and constraints (response rate) in inviting the respondents to attend face to face interview prospectively for the 2 nd time, we used the recommended “minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions” . Hence, test-retest was conducted using n = 110. The same was prospectively informed and approved by the MAPI Research Trust. Thank you for pointing out, we have removed the statement now. The purpose of Pilot study and cognitive debriefing is now mentioned in the method section (lines 235 -242). Reviewer 1 comment Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Authors’ response Changes done accordingly, thank you Reviewer 1 comment Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. Authors’ response Yes, thank you for reminding us of our primary purpose of addressing the methodological gap of previous work. We have now amended the changes and added content according to your valid suggestions. (Discussion section, lines 353 – 364) “ it is important to the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation. Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study”. Reference; Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, Franklin JD, Lawrence BD, et al. Challenging the norm: further psychometric investigation of the Neck Disability Index. Spine J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.027. And, the same is mentioned as well. Please suggest us if the content added is justifying. Thank you again for pointing out. Reviewer 1 comment References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. Authors’ response Done accordingly Competing Interests: None Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq , Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India 08 Aug 2024 Author Response Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, ... Continue reading Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 1 comment Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way. The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are amended in the background section accordingly. We recruited n = 30 individuals for cognitive debriefing & n = 211 for the psychometric testing. Both samples are now mentioned in methods section of abstract (lines 43 - 44) and manuscript (methods-participant sub-section – lines 146-147). (Methods, Inclusion and exclusion criteria-Subsection; lines 156 -164). Reviewer 1 comment Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Authors’ response The changes are now amended in the introduction section to improve the cohesion and lead towards the need for the study. (Introduction section, page 4 lines 89 – 95, lines 120 -126) The reference is now modified accordingly. Reviewer 1 comment Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Authors’ response Thank you, as per the suggestion we have removed the observational study design. And amended changes related to the methods used (methods, lines 135-136). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. (Methods section, lines 165 -171). A total of 220 respondent consented and 9 participants either did not complete the questionnaire or the data sheet was not complete. The figure 1 is changed now accordingly Thank you for the suggestion, we have amended the changes accordingly (Methods section; lines 262 -265) “test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient's clinical condit110ion and minimal memory-related effects(Marx et al., 2003).Yes, considering the difficulty and constraints (response rate) in inviting the respondents to attend face to face interview prospectively for the 2 nd time, we used the recommended “minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions” . Hence, test-retest was conducted using n = 110. The same was prospectively informed and approved by the MAPI Research Trust. Thank you for pointing out, we have removed the statement now. The purpose of Pilot study and cognitive debriefing is now mentioned in the method section (lines 235 -242). Reviewer 1 comment Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Authors’ response Changes done accordingly, thank you Reviewer 1 comment Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. Authors’ response Yes, thank you for reminding us of our primary purpose of addressing the methodological gap of previous work. We have now amended the changes and added content according to your valid suggestions. (Discussion section, lines 353 – 364) “ it is important to the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation. Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study”. Reference; Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, Franklin JD, Lawrence BD, et al. Challenging the norm: further psychometric investigation of the Neck Disability Index. Spine J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.027. And, the same is mentioned as well. Please suggest us if the content added is justifying. Thank you again for pointing out. Reviewer 1 comment References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. Authors’ response Done accordingly Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 1 comment Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way. The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are amended in the background section accordingly. We recruited n = 30 individuals for cognitive debriefing & n = 211 for the psychometric testing. Both samples are now mentioned in methods section of abstract (lines 43 - 44) and manuscript (methods-participant sub-section – lines 146-147). (Methods, Inclusion and exclusion criteria-Subsection; lines 156 -164). Reviewer 1 comment Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Authors’ response The changes are now amended in the introduction section to improve the cohesion and lead towards the need for the study. (Introduction section, page 4 lines 89 – 95, lines 120 -126) The reference is now modified accordingly. Reviewer 1 comment Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Authors’ response Thank you, as per the suggestion we have removed the observational study design. And amended changes related to the methods used (methods, lines 135-136). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. (Methods section, lines 165 -171). A total of 220 respondent consented and 9 participants either did not complete the questionnaire or the data sheet was not complete. The figure 1 is changed now accordingly Thank you for the suggestion, we have amended the changes accordingly (Methods section; lines 262 -265) “test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient's clinical condit110ion and minimal memory-related effects(Marx et al., 2003).Yes, considering the difficulty and constraints (response rate) in inviting the respondents to attend face to face interview prospectively for the 2 nd time, we used the recommended “minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions” . Hence, test-retest was conducted using n = 110. The same was prospectively informed and approved by the MAPI Research Trust. Thank you for pointing out, we have removed the statement now. The purpose of Pilot study and cognitive debriefing is now mentioned in the method section (lines 235 -242). Reviewer 1 comment Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Authors’ response Changes done accordingly, thank you Reviewer 1 comment Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. Authors’ response Yes, thank you for reminding us of our primary purpose of addressing the methodological gap of previous work. We have now amended the changes and added content according to your valid suggestions. (Discussion section, lines 353 – 364) “ it is important to the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation. Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study”. Reference; Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, Franklin JD, Lawrence BD, et al. Challenging the norm: further psychometric investigation of the Neck Disability Index. Spine J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.027. And, the same is mentioned as well. Please suggest us if the content added is justifying. Thank you again for pointing out. Reviewer 1 comment References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. Authors’ response Done accordingly Competing Interests: None Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 18 Dec 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 Version 2 (revision) 08 Aug 24 read read Version 1 18 Dec 23 read read Prem Venkatesan , Manipal College of Health Professions, Bangalore, India Y. Ravi shankar Reddy , King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Venkatesan P. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 12 Sep 2024 | for Version 2 Prem Venkatesan , Manipal College of Health Professions, Bangalore, India 0 Views copyright © 2024 Venkatesan P. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Authors addressed the queries raised and modified appropriately. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My area of expertise is musculoskeletal pain and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Venkatesan P. Peer Review Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312341) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312341 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Reddy Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 23 Aug 2024 | for Version 2 Y. Ravi shankar Reddy , Department of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Aseer Province, Saudi Arabia 0 Views copyright © 2024 Reddy Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The authors have thoroughly and successfully addressed the concerns raised, leading to a significant improvement in the manuscript's overall quality. Therefore, I am pleased to recommend that the manuscript be imdexed in its current form. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 24 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India Thank you so much sir for your comments and approving the peer review. We express our sincere gratutude View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Reddy YRs. Peer Review Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.169343.r312340) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2#referee-response-312340 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Reddy Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 11 Jul 2024 | for Version 1 Y. Ravi shankar Reddy , Department of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Aseer Province, Saudi Arabia 0 Views copyright © 2024 Reddy Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer's Report Title: Adaption and Psychometric Evaluation of the Hindi Version of Neck Disability Index in the Rural Population of Northern India: A Cross-Cultural Study Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Partly Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 2 comment Abstract: The abstract provides a succinct overview of the study. However, it can be improved by adding more specific details to give readers a clearer understanding of the study's significance and outcomes. Authors’ response The background section of the abstract is revised accordingly. Reviewer 2 comment The background should specify the importance of validating the NDI for rural Hindi-speaking populations and how this fills a gap in current research. The methods section should detail the translation process more concisely, emphasizing the steps involved. The results section should highlight key statistics like the ICC, Cronbach's alpha, SEM, MDC, and correlation coefficients. Finally, the conclusions should reinforce the clinical applicability and importance of the NDI-Hi in rural settings. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are made according to the suggestions Reviewer 2 comment Introduction: The introduction effectively outlines the prevalence and impact of non-specific neck pain globally and in India, providing a solid rationale for the study. To enhance it further, include more recent statistics and studies to underscore the growing burden of neck pain. Highlight the unique challenges faced by rural populations in India, such as limited access to healthcare and language barriers. Additionally, the introduction should emphasize the importance of culturally adapting the NDI to ensure its relevance and accuracy for Hindi-speaking patients. This sets a clear context for the need for the NDI-Hi and its potential benefits. Authors’ response Thank you, amendments related to language barriers, and the need for a clear context related outcome measures is emphasized. Reviewer 2 comment Methods: The methods section is comprehensive, detailing the translation and adaptation process meticulously. To improve clarity, consider breaking down the translation steps into sub-sections with clear headings for each stage: forward translation, synthesis, backward translation, expert committee review, and pilot testing. This would make the process easier to follow. The section on psychometric testing should provide more detail on the statistical methods used, such as the criteria for factor analysis and the rationale for the selected time intervals for test-retest reliability. Including a flowchart summarizing the entire process could also enhance clarity and readability. Authors’ response Thank you, we have included a new figure 1 based on the suggestions- to clearly explain the steps into sub-sections. The rationale for using 48 hours interval for test retest reliability is now included with reference and a new flowchart added (figure 1). Details regarding factor analysis is now added under the statistical analysis section. Reviewer 2 comment Results: The results section presents the findings effectively, with detailed statistical analysis. To make it more impactful, provide more context for the statistical figures, explaining what they mean in practical terms. For instance, elaborate on how the high Cronbach’s alpha and ICC values demonstrate the reliability and validity of the NDI-Hi. Include more descriptive statistics and graphical representations, such as bar charts or histograms, to visually summarize the data. Additionally, the demographic characteristics of the participants should be discussed in relation to the findings, highlighting any significant correlations or trends. Authors’ response We have added contents to explain the significance of findings. Reviewer 2 comment Discussion: The discussion appropriately interprets the results, linking them back to the study's objectives and existing literature. To deepen the analysis, compare the psychometric properties of the NDI-Hi with those of other versions used in different cultural contexts. Discuss any unexpected findings or limitations encountered during the study, such as the challenges related to the driving item. Propose potential solutions or areas for future research to address these limitations. Furthermore, emphasize the clinical implications of the NDI-Hi, particularly how it can improve patient outcomes and research quality in rural Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have now included statements related to the previous version of NDI and clinical implication related contents in discussion section. Reviewer 2 comment Conclusion: The conclusion succinctly summarizes the study's findings and their significance. To enhance it, reiterate the key strengths of the NDI-Hi, such as its high reliability and validity. Highlight the broader impact of having a validated Hindi version of the NDI, such as its potential to inform public health policies and improve clinical practices in rural India. Additionally, suggest specific applications of the NDI-Hi in both clinical and research settings, emphasizing its role in enhancing the understanding and management of neck pain among Hindi-speaking populations. Authors’ response We have amended changes accordingly. Regards, Thank you View more View less Competing Interests None reply Respond Report a concern Reddy YRs. Peer Review Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291969) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291969 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 Venkatesan P. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 05 Jul 2024 | for Version 1 Prem Venkatesan , Manipal College of Health Professions, Bangalore, India 0 Views copyright © 2024 Venkatesan P. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Dear Editor, Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review the manuscript titled: “Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study” I have a few concerns about this manuscript: Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. General Comments The manuscript needs language editing and grammatical correction. There is a lack of coherence and cohesion throughout the text. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise My area of expertise is musculoskeletal pain and cardiopulmonary rehabilitation I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 08 Aug 2024 Dr Mohammad Sidiq, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, 203201, India Dear Editor, We express our sincere appreciation to the editor for the time and interest in this study. Dear reviewers, We appreciate and thank you for the valuable comments, suggestions, and interest in this research paper. We have amended the corrections according to the comments and suggestions provided. In addition, Spelling, grammar, and sentence structure errors have been corrected and the manuscript is revised based on the journal style requirements. All the authors agreed on the changes made in response to the reviewer's comments. Please find our responses below: With regards, Dr Mohammad Sidiq Reviewer 1 comment Abstract The background of the study is not convincing enough, this can be written in a more acceptable way. The different sample sizes used in the manuscript are absent in the methods section. Authors’ response Thank you, the changes are amended in the background section accordingly. We recruited n = 30 individuals for cognitive debriefing & n = 211 for the psychometric testing. Both samples are now mentioned in methods section of abstract (lines 43 - 44) and manuscript (methods-participant sub-section – lines 146-147). (Methods, Inclusion and exclusion criteria-Subsection; lines 156 -164). Reviewer 1 comment Introduction The introduction contains a good number of facts and findings, but it looks jumbled up and it doesn’t properly lead to the need for the study. This can be improved by properly articulating the facts. Reference Princpal et al.m is wrongly cited. Authors’ response The changes are now amended in the introduction section to improve the cohesion and lead towards the need for the study. (Introduction section, page 4 lines 89 – 95, lines 120 -126) The reference is now modified accordingly. Reviewer 1 comment Methods This study is mentioned as a cross-cultural study that has studied the adoption and psychometric evaluation of the NDI scale, But it is mentioned as an observational study. This has to be cross-checked as cross-cultural studies are not purely observational studies and adoption and psychometric evaluations are mostly methodological studies. This has to be clarified. How was the sample size estimated? Figure 1: Incomplete The data was collected from the subjects after 48 hours, and some justification was given in the discussion. Please provide the evidence for this. Has any evidence suggested that collecting data in 48 hours can give a better outcome? If yes please do justify it in the methodology section also. The sample size to be used for psychometric evaluation and test-retest reliability has to be similar. However, there is a disparity between the numbers used. What is the justification for the change in sample size? It was mentioned that the gender-specific analysis was done. I couldn’t find any analysis. What was the purpose of the pilot study? Authors’ response Thank you, as per the suggestion we have removed the observational study design. And amended changes related to the methods used (methods, lines 135-136). Considering the lack of specific guidelines and different authors used different formula to estimate sample size like; factor analysis formula, Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy (values ranging from 0.50 to 0.60), regression formula and item-sample ratio estimation We intended to include all eligible patients with CNSNP attending both the study center’s during the study period to improve the statistical estimations and consistency of the results. (Methods section, lines 165 -171). A total of 220 respondent consented and 9 participants either did not complete the questionnaire or the data sheet was not complete. The figure 1 is changed now accordingly Thank you for the suggestion, we have amended the changes accordingly (Methods section; lines 262 -265) “test-retest re-administration was set at 48 hours, which is a minimum duration that is likely to result in minimal alterations in the patient's clinical condit110ion and minimal memory-related effects(Marx et al., 2003).Yes, considering the difficulty and constraints (response rate) in inviting the respondents to attend face to face interview prospectively for the 2 nd time, we used the recommended “minimum sample size required for two-tailed Cronbach’s alpha test was calculated using the Bonet formula based on assumptions” . Hence, test-retest was conducted using n = 110. The same was prospectively informed and approved by the MAPI Research Trust. Thank you for pointing out, we have removed the statement now. The purpose of Pilot study and cognitive debriefing is now mentioned in the method section (lines 235 -242). Reviewer 1 comment Results Please align the tables corresponding to the findings. The current presentation makes it tough to correlate the findings. Authors’ response Changes done accordingly, thank you Reviewer 1 comment Discussion The discussion can be made better by stressing the findings. This study was done on the shortcomings of the previous study. When the primary aim of this study was to address the shortcomings, the results can also be specific to those. This study has only reported internal consistency and validity, but the aim of the study was not at all discussed with facts and findings. Authors’ response Yes, thank you for reminding us of our primary purpose of addressing the methodological gap of previous work. We have now amended the changes and added content according to your valid suggestions. (Discussion section, lines 353 – 364) “ it is important to the commonly used NDI raw score is not linear and should likely not be used in interpretation. Hence, it is recommended to transform the raw NDI score into a linear measure (convert to 100) prior to data analysis. The lack of methodologies related to score transformations, hypothesis tested, dimensionality, and testing of validity in the previous work did not permit a meaningful comparison with findings of this study”. Reference; Hung M, Cheng C, Hon SD, Franklin JD, Lawrence BD, et al. Challenging the norm: further psychometric investigation of the Neck Disability Index. Spine J. 2015. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.027. And, the same is mentioned as well. Please suggest us if the content added is justifying. Thank you again for pointing out. Reviewer 1 comment References Two studies with the author name “Study” are wrongly cited. Authors’ response Done accordingly View more View less Competing Interests None reply Respond Report a concern Venkatesan P. Peer Review Report For: Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of Neck Disability Index in the rural population of Northern India: A cross cultural study [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2024, 12 :1599 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.156005.r291968) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v1#referee-response-291968 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Sidiq M et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599", templates : { twitter : "Adaption and psychometric evaluation of the Hindi version of.... Sidiq M et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/12-1599/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/142451/169343") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "169343"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "291968": 28, "291969": 18, "291970": 0, "312340": 14, "312341": 14, "317334": 0, "317335": 0, "314204": 0, "317340": 0, "314205": 0, "317341": 0, "314206": 0, "317342": 0, "314207": 0, "317343": 0, "317336": 0, "317337": 0, "314202": 0, "317338": 0, "314203": 0, "317339": 0, "314208": 0, "314209": 0, "314210": 0, "314211": 0, "291964": 0, "291965": 0, "291966": 0, "291967": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "85743316-b343-4e57-a7ae-9889c75d2081"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });