Mandarin Chinese version of the Aging Voice Index

OBJECTIVES: This study developed the Mandarin Chinese version of the Aging Voice Index (AVI), with preliminary validation of the scale for potential clinical applications. STUDY DESIGN: Scale development. METHODS: The experimental procedure involved: (1) cross‐cultural adaptation of the original AVI into the Mandarin Chinese version (CAVI); (2) evaluation by expert panel; (3) back translation; (4) pilot testing; (5) development of the final CAVI; (6) scale validation with 68 older adults of 60–89 years old (29 females and 39 males), 34 with voice disorders and 34 age‐matched with normal voice. Internal consistency reliability, test–retest reliability, content validity, criterion‐related validity, and discriminatory ability (diagnostic accuracy) of the CAVI were evaluated. RESULTS: There were high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.9733), high test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.9578, p < 0.01), high content validity (content validity index = 0.9710), high criterion‐related validity (Pearson's r = 0.9439, p < 0.01 between CAVI and Voice Handicap Index‐10; r = 0.8070, p < 0.01 between CAVI and voice‐related quality of life [V‐RQOL]), and significant difference in CAVI scores between the two groups with huge effect size (t(34.69) = −11.59, Cohen's d = 2.81, p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed a high diagnostic accuracy of the CAVI, with an area under the curve of 0.9974 (p < 0.001) and a cut‐off score of 12.0 with 100% sensitivity and 97.1% specificity. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggested that the CAVI could be a reliable and valid standardized self‐assessment questionnaire tool for clinical evaluation of the impact of voice problems specifically for Mandarin‐speaking older adults. Further studies should explore a full‐scale validation of the CAVI for being a standard clinical tool, including for older adults in Mainland China. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b (case–control study).