Translation and validation of the Chinese version of the menstrual distress questionnaire

Abstract

Background The Menstrual Distress Questionnaire (MDQ) is a commonly used questionnaire that assesses various symptoms and distress associated with the menstrual cycle in women. However, the questionnaire has not been completely translated into Chinese with rigorous reliability and validity testing. Methods This study translated the Menstrual Distress Questionnaire Form Cycle (MDQC) from English into Chinese: MDQCC in two stages. First, it was translated forward and backward using Jones’ model; second, to test the validity and reliability, 210 Chinese-speaking women were recruited through online announcements and posters posted between June 2019 and May 2020. Expert validity, construct validity, convergent validity, and factorial validity were determined using content validity index (CVI), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), composite reliability (CR), and exploratory factor analysis, respectively. For concurrent criterion validity, MDQCC score was compared with three existing pain scales. Reliability was evaluated using internal consistency across items and two-week test-retest reliability over time. Results The CVI for content validity was .92. Item-CVI for expert validities among the 46 items ranged from .50 − 1; scale-CVI for the eight subscales, from .87 − 1; ICC, from .650 − .897; and CRs, from .303 − .881. Pearson correlation coefficients between MDQCC and short-form McGill pain questionnaire, present pain intensity, and visual analog scale scores were .640, .519, and .575, respectively. Cronbach’s α for internal consistency was satisfactory (.932). ICC for test-retest reliability was .852 for the entire MDQCC. Conclusion MDQCC was valid and reliable for Mandarin Chinese-speaking women. It can be used to evaluate female psychiatric symptoms related to the menstrual cycle in future work.