ArticleGlobal qualitative nursing research
Challenges When Translating and Culturally Adapting a Measurement Instrument: The Suitability and Comprehensibility of Materials (SAM+CAM).
Article in Global qualitative nursing research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Content Validity Assessment of a Virtual Patient-Based Learning Platform for TMD Education among Orofacial Pain Experts.Journal of dental education · 2026Article
- Content validation of educational materials on maternal depression in Nigeria.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is evidence that low suitability and comprehensibility of printed education materials (PEMs) affects patients' and relatives' ability to read and comprehend information. However, few instruments measure the suitability of written information, and none exist in the Swedish language. The aim was to describe the translation and adaptation of the Suitability and Comprehensibility of Materials (SAM+CAM) instrument into the Swedish language and health care context and to explore challenges related to this process. The SAM+CAM instrument was translated and culturally adapted in five steps: forward translation, synthesis, back translation, expert review, and pretests. Differences were found when translating and culturally adapting the SAM+CAM instrument in the areas of semantic, idiomatic, and experiences. Participants revealed several clarity inconsistencies between items. They also identified linguistic differences and unfamiliar wording; they found that the instrument was perplexing to use and lacked knowledge regarding the specific health care areas in the examined PEMs. The cultural perspective is a significant factor that influences the usability of PEMs. Therefore, expert groups of participants are useful when adapting instruments to different cultures. The Swedish SAM+CAM instrument requires experienced and highly qualified raters.
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.