A systematic approach to cross-cultural adaptation of survey tools
Background: Involving patients in health care is increasingly acknowledged as the best way to empower patients to manage their illness. Whilst the involvement of patients is laudable and widely recognised, how much they want to be involved needs to be ascertained. Research has shown that inappropriate provision of information to patients can increase their anxieties towards illness and alter perceptions of medicines’ usefulness, consequently impacting on medicines’ taking behaviour. Tools have been validated in the UK to identify information desires, perceived usefulness of medicines and anxiety felt about illness. There is a need to adapt validated tools for use in other settings and countries. This paper is the first of a series describing the processes involved in the adaptation and validation of these.
Aim: to review and adapt the processes established to translate and back translate scales and tools in practice.
Methods: The survey tool was translated and back-translated according to published guidelines, subsequently tested in a sample of medical patients and further refined by seeking health care professionals’ perceptions and input from lay people.
Results: Data demonstrates the importance of including various perspectives in this process, through which sequential modifications were made to the original scales. Issues relating to religious beliefs, educational and health literacy differences between countries highlight the relevance of taking cultural values into account. Some led to significant modifications, discussed in this first paper, and tested for validity and reliability in a second paper.
2. Stevenson FA, Cox K, Britten N, Dunbar Y. A systematic review of the research on communication between patients and health care professionals about medicines: the consequences for concordance. Health Expect 2004; 7(3): 235-245.
3. Koo M, Krass I, Aslani P. Consumers opinions on medicines information and factors affecting its use - an Australian experience. Int J Pharm Pract 2002; 10: 107-114.
4. Duggan C, Bates I. Development and evaluation of a survey tool to explore patients' perceptions of their prescribed drugs and need for drug information. Int J Pharm Pract 2000; 8(1): 42-52.
5. Duggan C, Bates I, Sturman S, Andersson E, Astrom K, Carlsson J. Validation of a 'desire for information' scale. Int J Pharm Pract 2000; 10(1): 31-37.
6) Weinman J. Patients and doctors. An outline of psychology as applied to medicine. Butterworth-Heineman Ltd Oxford: 1987 (158-179). ISBN 0750620579.
7. PCNE. Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe. Available at www.pcne.org (accessed 11/12/2004).
8. Brislin RW. The wording and translation of research instruments. In Lonner, W.L. & Berry, J.W. Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Sage Publications, Newbury Park: 1986 (137-164). ISBN 0803925492.
9. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidem 1993; 46 (12): 1417-1432.
10. MAPI Research Institute. 2005, "Linguistic Validation Process". available at www.mapi-research.fr (accessed 20/04/2004)
11. Brislin RW. Back-translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross-Cult Psych 1970; 3: 185-216.
12. Jones PS, Lee JW, Phillips LR, Zhang XE, Jaceldo KB. An adaptation of Brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research. Nurs Res 2001;50 (5): 300-304.
13. Small R, Yelland J, Lumley J, Rice PL, Cotronei V, Warren R. Cross-cultural research: trying to do it better. 2. Enhancing data quality. Austr N Zealand J Public Health 1999; 23 (4): 390-395.
14. Hilton A, Skrutkowski M. Translating instruments into other languages: development and testing processes. Cancer Nurs 2002; 25 (1): 1-7.
15. Bullinger M, Alonso J, Apolone G, Leplege A, Sullivan M, Wood-Dauphinee S, Gandek B, Wagner A, Aaronson N, Bech P, Fukuhara S, Kaasa S, Ware JE Jr. Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidem1998; 51 (11): 913-923.
16. Sperber AD. Translation and Validation of Study Instruments for Cross-Cultural Research. Gastroent 2004; 126(1): S124-S128.
17. Abraido-Lanza AF, Vasquez E, Echeverria SE. En las manos de Dios [in God's hands]: Religious and other forms of coping among Latinos with arthritis. J Consult Clin Psychol 2004;72(1):91-102.
18. Grimaldi A. L'acceptation de la maladie diabetique. Ann Endocr (Paris) 2003; 64 (3 Suppl): S22-S26.
19. Baker LM. A new method for studying patient information needs and information-seeking patterns, Top Health Info Man 1995; 16 (2): 19-28.
The authors hereby transfer, assign or otherwise convey to Pharmacy Practice (1) the right to grant permission to republish or reprint the stated material, in whole or in part, without a fee; (2) the right to print or epublish copies for free distribution or sale; and (3) the right to republish the stated material in any format (electronic or printed). In addition, the undersigned affirms that the article described above has not previously been published, in whole or part, is not subject to copyright or other rights except by the author(s), and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere, except as communicated in writing to Pharmacy Practice with this document.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY-NC-ND) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Author Self-Archiving Policy
Pharmacy Practice permits and encourages authors to post and archive the final PDFs of their respective articles submitted to the journal on personal websites or institutional repositories after publication, while providing bibliographic details that credit its publication in this journal.