ArticleInternational journal of translation and interpretation studies
The Process of Translating and Culturally Adapting a Digital Elder Abuse Intervention.
Article in International journal of translation and interpretation studies. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Elder Abuse is a national public health problem affecting one in ten older adults. It is estimated that only 4% of cases are reported to authorities. Latino populations that reside in the U.S. are less likely to report abuse, and language barriers may limit access to resources and prevent seeking help. There is a need for tools and services to not only be translated but culturally adapted to ensure the integrity and comprehension of the translated product. We conducted an extensive literature review that informed our multi-step language translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the VOICES digital health elder abuse intervention from English to Spanish. This process involved a team of independent translators for an iterative, step-by-step approach that included synthesis and review at each step of the process. Translations were individually rated by the review team based on a 7-point Likert scale. The review team found the translations appropriate and highly satisfactory. Comparison of separate versions of translated items highlighted key linguistic variations and issues that informed the team when producing the final translated product. Challenges found during the translation process were categorized as a posteriori. Examples are included. Following a multi-step, iterative framework for the translation and cultural adaptation provided a highly accurate product. Involving multiple translators from varying backgrounds reduced the risk for translation bias and flagged cultural nuances that allowed the research team to identify areas that needed more attention and care. The product will be further culturally adapted with the help of the community via cognitive interviews with Spanish-speaking individuals relevant to the intervention's intended target population before following up with a study to compare with the original findings of the intervention's parent study.
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.