Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38840704›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2024

Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation, and Validation of Measurement Instruments: A Practical Guideline for Novice Researchers.

Paulo Cruchinho, María Dolores López-Franco, Manuel Luís Capelas, Sofia Almeida, Phillippa May Bennett, Marcelle Miranda da Silva, Gisela Teixeira, Elisabete Nunes, Pedro Lucas, Filomena Gaspar and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07620015 (Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Turkish Version of the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure), which is not on this map. Cited by 212 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
212citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07620015 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Validation of the Turkish Version of the Ankle Fracture Outcome of Rehabilitation Measure (A-FORM-TR): A Multi-Centre Prospective Observational Study

TypeobservationalSponsorUtku GürhanRan2026 to 2027Enrolled150ConditionsAnkle Fractures, Ankle Injuries
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

212 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Psychometric Properties of Eating Behaviour Instruments for Older Adults: A Systematic Review.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

152 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Paulo CruchinhoNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5031-5727
María Dolores López-FrancoCTS-464 Nursing and Innovation in Healthcare, University of Jaén, Jaén, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8589-2551
Manuel Luís CapelasUniversidade Católica Portuguesa, Faculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Health (CIIS), Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8993-6854
Sofia AlmeidaUniversidade Católica Portuguesa, Faculty of Health Sciences and Nursing, Center for Interdisciplinary Research in Health (CIIS), Porto, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1874-0432
Phillippa May BennettCenter for English, Translation, and Anglo-Portuguese Studies (CETAPS), Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8787-2199
Marcelle Miranda da SilvaNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-4872-7252
Gisela TeixeiraNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-2228-8263
Elisabete NunesNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-7598-0670
Pedro LucasNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-2560-7306
Filomena GasparNursing Research, Innovation and Development Center (CIDNUR) of Lisbon, Nursing School of Lisbon, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8139-2717
Handovers4SafeCare

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cross-cultural validation of self-reported measurement instruments for research is a long and complex process, which involves specific risks of bias that could affect the research process and results. Furthermore, it requires researchers to have a wide range of technical knowledge about the translation, adaptation and pre-test aspects, their purposes and options, about the different psychometric properties, and the required evidence for their assessment and knowledge about the quantitative data processing and analysis using statistical software. This article aimed: 1) identify all guidelines and recommendations for translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation within the healthcare sciences; 2) describe the methodological approaches established in these guidelines for conducting translation, adaptation, and cross-cultural validation; and 3) provide a practical guideline featuring various methodological options for novice researchers involved in translating, adapting, and validating measurement instruments. Forty-two guidelines on translation, adaptation, or cross-cultural validation of measurement instruments were obtained from "CINAHL with Full Text" (via EBSCO) and "MEDLINE with Full Text". A content analysis was conducted to identify the similarities and differences in the methodological approaches recommended. Bases on these similarities and differences, we proposed an eight-step guideline that includes: a) forward translation; 2) synthesis of translations; 3) back translation; 4) harmonization; 5) pre-testing; 6) field testing; 7) psychometric validation, and 8) analysis of psychometric properties. It is a practical guideline because it provides extensive and comprehensive information on the methodological approaches available to researchers. This is the first methodological literature review carried out in the healthcare sciences regarding the methodological approaches recommended by existing guidelines.

Indexed as

cross-cultural comparisondecision-makinghealth services researchpsychometric propertiesresearch designvalidation studies

Identifiers

PMID38840704
PMCPMC11151507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.