Adapting Quality of Life Instruments

Abstract

Due to the international nature of many clinical studies and trials it is often necessary to produce several language versions of specific measures. While it is generally acknowledged that it is necessary to produce versions that are conceptually equivalent, the best method of achieving this is more controversial. It is commonly stated that there is a gold-standard method, which involves forward and backward translation. However, no evidence has been presented to support this view. This paper argues that the "gold-standard" method is difficult to support and describes an alternative method involving dual translation panels that has been used in the production of all adaptations of needs-based quality of life instruments.

Tradução e Adaptação do Conteúdo: A-19, Scale of Children’s Attitudes, de Grims e Guitar (1977)

“…Tal permitiu obterem-se traduções que Beaton, Guillemin, & Ferraz (2000) caracterizam como sendo a linguagem utilizada pela população em geral. Ainda assim, Swaine-Verdier, Doward, Hagell, Thorsen, & McKenna (2004) referem que, dada a necessidade de manter-se uma linguagem acessível à população-alvo aquando a tradução do instrumento, devem recrutar-se tradutores que contactem com públicos diversificados nomeadamente professores.…”

Consequences of Screening in Breast Cancer (COS-BC): development of a questionnaire

“…Several translation methodologies have been suggested [19]. One of these includes a forwardÁbackward translation, which does not guarantee linguistic quality of the target version of the questionnaire [11,20]. In this study, quality control of the target version was conducted in two steps: the lay panel and the group interviews.…”

“…The translation was carried out following an internationally accepted method involving two panels [11]. The members of the first panel were bilingual in English/Danish with Danish as their mother tongue.…”

A Brazilian version of the "Children's Interview for Psychiatric Syndromes" (ChIPS)

“…Swaine-Verdier et al 12 suggest that the traditional process of translation and backtranslation is based on a series of incorrect assumptions, such as, for example, the notion that the backtranslator is less subject to errors than the translator. Some mistakes could occur both in the translation and in the backtranslation process.…”

“…The preference for this approach of using multiple translations and a multidisciplinary team, comprised of psychiatrists, child psychiatrists, and, later on, a linguist, to discuss the translations, was undertaken based on the work of Swaine-Verdier 12 . This author performed a critical review of the process of translation and backtranslation.…”