ArticleBMC medical research methodology2020
Translation method is validity evidence for construct equivalence: analysis of secondary data routinely collected during translations of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ).
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Structural validity of the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire: A systematic review.The International journal of eating disorders · 2022Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dermatology: A Systematic Review.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2021Pooled it
- Maternal health literacy among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Ghana: a cross-sectional study.Global epidemiology · 2026Article
- The Assessment of Structural Validity and Internal Consistency of the Polish Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) in Primary Care Settings.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Translation and Assessment of Structural Validity and Internal Consistency of the Polish Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) in Health Professions Students.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Questionnaire in Swedish Prehospital Care: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Pilot Psychometric Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Translation and Psychometric Validation of the Amharic eHealth Literacy Questionnaire: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Translation and cultural adaptation of the health literacy questionnaire (HLQ) in Morocco.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2026Article
- Developing a validity testing plan for a patient-reported outcome measure in a new context using the argument-based approach to validity.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Health literacy profiles of people living with type 2 diabetes: a cluster-based approach to inform tailored interventions-the Entred 3 study.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2026Article
- Discrepancies in the country versions of the WHOQOL-BREF as a potential source of error in assessing quality of life and a barrier to comparative research.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
- Validation of the Korean Version of a Knowledge Assessment Tool for Children With Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Using AI in Forward-Backward Translation of Questionnaires for Men Invited to Prostate Cancer Screening: Methodological Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Participatory adaptation of mental health screening tools for school-aged children: a qualitative study in Slovakia.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of the Japanese eHealth Literacy Questionnaire Among Users in a Super-Aged Society: Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Principles of good practice for concept definition in the context of translation and linguistic validation of clinical outcome assessments (COAs).Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2025Article
- A national survey of osteopaths' conceptions of practice in France: structural validity of the Osteo-TAQfr and the tendency toward technical rationality.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Health literacy among individuals with type 2 diabetes in France: greater social inequalities among women; the Entred 3 study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Validation Study of the Iranian Version of Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF-Q): A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
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
Abstract
backgroundCross-cultural research with patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) assumes that the PROM in the target language will measure the same construct in the same way as the PROM in the source language. Yet translation methods are rarely used to qualitatively maximise construct equivalence or to describe the intents of each item to support common understanding within translation teams. This study aimed to systematically investigate the utility of the Translation Integrity Procedure (TIP), in particular the use of item intent descriptions, to maximise construct equivalence during the translation process, and to demonstrate how documented data from the TIP contributes evidence to a validity argument for construct equivalence between translated and source language PROMs.
methodsAnalysis of secondary data was conducted on routinely collected data in TIP Management Grids of translations (n = 9) of the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ) that took place between August 2014 and August 2015: Arabic, Czech, French (Canada), French (France), Hindi, Indonesian, Slovak, Somali and Spanish (Argentina). Two researchers initially independently deductively coded the data to nine common types of translation errors. Round two of coding included an identified 10th code. Coded data were compared for discrepancies, and checked when needed with a third researcher for final code allocation.
resultsAcross the nine translations, 259 changes were made to provisional forward translations and were coded into 10 types of errors. Most frequently coded errors were Complex word or phrase (n = 99), Semantic (n = 54) and Grammar (n = 27). Errors coded least frequently were Cultural errors (n = 7) and Printed errors (n = 5).
conclusionsTo advance PROM validation practice, this study investigated a documented translation method that includes the careful specification of descriptions of item intents. Assumptions that translated PROMs have construct equivalence between linguistic contexts can be incorrect due to errors in translation. Of particular concern was the use of high level complex words by translators, which, if undetected, could cause flawed interpretation of data from people with low literacy. Item intent descriptions can support translations to maximise construct equivalence, and documented translation data can contribute evidence to justify score interpretation and use of translated PROMS in new linguistic contexts.
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.