ArticleScientific reports2024
Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of Numerical Pain Rating Scale and Global Rating of Change in Tibetan musculoskeletal trauma patients.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tibetan-speaking patients seeking care in predominantly Mandarin-speaking healthcare settings frequently face communication barriers, leading to potential disparities and difficulties in accessing care. To address this issue, we translated, culturally adapted, and validated the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Global Rating of Change (GRoC) into Tibetan (NPRS-Tib and GRoC-Tib), aiming to facilitate cross-linguistic and cross-cultural interactions while examining potential challenges in the adaptation process. Using standard translation-backward translation methods, expert review, pilot testing, and validation through a cross-sectional study with a short-term longitudinal component, we engaged 100 Tibetan patients with musculoskeletal trauma for psychometric validation, including 37 women (aged 22-60 years, mean age 39.1 years). The NPRS-Tib and GRoC-Tib exhibited outstanding psychometric properties, with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) of 0.983 for NPRS-Tib indicating superb test-retest reliability, and expert review confirming good content validity for both instruments. A Spearman's correlation coefficient (Rho) of -0.261 (P = 0.0087) revealed a significant, albeit weak, correlation between changes in NPRS-Tib scores and GRoC-Tib scores. The adaptation process also presented notable challenges, including translation discrepancies from translators' diverse backgrounds and levels of expertise, ambiguity in scale options, and the lack of established tools for criterion validity assessment in Tibetan.
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.