A study comparing five questionnaires related to assistive technology choices and outcome measures was undertaken by Bárbara Iansã de Lima Barroso, Cláudia Regina Cabral Galvão, Luiz Bueno da Silva, and Selma Lancman in a paper published in 2019, titled A Systematic Review of Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Instruments for the Selection of Assistive Technologies. 

The comparison considered the quality of the measuring tools and provided a useful table with results under the headings “Internal consistency,  Reliability, Measurement error.  Content validity, Structural validity,  Cross-cultural validity,  Criterion validity and Responsiveness”.  The questionnaires chosen were all very different and the authors admitted some limitations to their study.  It should be noted that PIADS can be used as an outcome measure for both supportive devices, systems and services such as AAC devices, the symbols and/or applications used, whereas some of the questionnaires use satisfaction ratings to evaluate how satisfied a person is with their ‘assistive device and the related services experienced’ such as QUEST.   

PIADS received excellent for six of the criteria used.  The other two were good and they mentioned that they had not used all the papers published about PIADS nor the number of translations now available.