ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Translation from english into Urdu of a clinical decision tool to screen older women with back pain for osteoporotic-related vertebral fragility fractures.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. 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.
- Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Targets for Pain Following Osteoporotic Vertebral Fractures.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVertebral fractures associated with osteoporosis are common in individuals over 65, yet most cases go undiagnosed. This is concerning as those with vertebral fractures are at an increased risk of future fractures. To address this gap in healthcare, and facilitate diagnosis, so that bone-protective medications can be initiated, we developed and validated a clinical decision tool called 'Vfrac'. Vfrac assists healthcare professionals in determining whether an older person with back pain requires a spinal radiograph to diagnose vertebral fractures. However, because Vfrac was developed in English, it remains inaccessible to non-English speakers. Given the high prevalence of vertebral fractures in South Asians, our study aimed to translate Vfrac from English to Urdu using a cross-cultural adaptation approach based on a standardised framework.
methodsVfrac was translated into Urdu by five independent translators who were provided with information about the tool's purpose and its components. Five different translators then back-translated the Urdu versions into English. A group of bilingual healthcare professionals and members of the public who spoke both English and Urdu reviewed and discussed the translations in reference to the original English questionnaire. The group selected the translations that best conveyed the intended meaning of each question, producing a final Urdu version of Vfrac. A bilingual healthcare professional conducted a final review and audio-recorded the Urdu Vfrac for accessibility.
resultsThe group of bilingual adults consisted of two healthcare professionals and three lay members, of whom four were female, and all aged 25 to 69 years. The final translated version of Vfrac written in Urdu was produced, ensuring it accurately reflected the original English version's meaning. To improve accessibility, an audio-recorded version was also created.
conclusionsThis study successfully adapted an English language clinical checklist, Vfrac, into Urdu through a structured cross-cultural adaptation process. To enhance accessibility and address healthcare disparities we strongly recommend incorporating audio-recordings alongside written translations. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study received ethical approval by the Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (FREC Ethics Ref: 13801) on the 27th of April 2023.
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.