ArticleThe American journal of drug and alcohol abuse2022
Improving Spanish translations of tobacco dependence measures using cognitive interviewing.
Article in The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundCognitive interviewing is the practice of systematically collecting feedback about survey items from members of the priority population, with the goal of identifying and rectifying problems to increase the comprehensibility of the survey. Evidence is limited on the extent to which this method of pretesting improves survey items.
objectiveThe current study examined the utility of incorporating cognitive interviewing to improve the Spanish translations of two measures of tobacco dependence.
methodsItems from the Spanish versions of the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (68 items) and Nicotine Dependence Syndrome Scale (19 items) were subjected to cognitive interviews with Spanish-speaking smokers. Problematic items were revised based on participant feedback and re-assessed in a second round of interviews (N = 23, 78.3% male; 21.7% female).
resultsTwenty-three of the 87 items demonstrated comprehension problems, and 67 items elicited at least one problem report. Number of problems were significantly fewer pre- vs. post-revision (t [90] = 6.55,
conclusionsIn combination with standard translation procedures, cognitive interviewing with the priority population appears to be a useful method for ensuring comprehensible and relevant item content.
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.