ArticleArchives of trauma research2016
Cross-Cultural Adaptations of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Treatment in Iran.
Article in Archives of trauma research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Face and Content Validity of the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for the Treatment of Iranian Patients.International journal of preventive medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccording to general ethical and legal principles, valid consent must be obtained before starting any procedure.
objectivesDue to the lack of a standard tool for assessing patients' capacity to consent to medical treatment in Iran, the present study was carried out aiming to devise a Persian version of a cross-cultural adaptation of the MacArthur competence assessment tool. PATIENTS AND
methodsBy reviewing different methods of cultural translation and adaptation for assessment tools, and due to the lack of consensus on its processes, we selected Wild's model as one of the most comprehensive methods in this regard. Wild's (2005) 10-stage model includes preparation, forward translation, reconciliation of the forward translation, back translation of reconciliation, back translation review, cognitive debriefing and cognitive review, and finalization, proofreading and final reporting. Using this model, we translated the MacArthur assessment tool and made it adaptable to Iranian patients.
resultsThe MacArthur assessment tool is not dependent on any specific culture and language. As a result, if translation and its scientific adaptation are done based on an integrated and detailed model, the tool can be used for every culture and language. In other words, this tool is not culture-specific; so, it is applicable in cases where a translation is needed, and it can be culturally adapted to suit different societies.
conclusionsIn the present study, we are able to focus on and prove the efficacy and benefits of this measurement tool.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.