ArticleJournal of audiology & otology2025
Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Field Testing of the Korean Version of the HEAR-COMMAND Tool: A Self-Rated ICF-Based Questionnaire for Assessing Hearing, Communication, and Conversation Disabilities in Korean-Speaking Populations.
Article in Journal of audiology & otology, 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.
- A Comparative Analysis of a Perceptual Hearing Loss Assessment Dataset and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Core Sets for Hearing Loss.Advances in rehabilitation science and practiceArticle
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
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesDespite the growing Korean population in the USA, barriers to healthcare access persist due to widespread limited English proficiency, particularly in hearing healthcare. A lack of culturally competent, multilingual resources has exacerbated these challenges. This study aimed to translate the HEAR-COMMAND Tool into Korean, adapt it culturally, and assess its comprehensibility, readability, and relevance to Korean individuals. SUBJECTS AND
methodsA systematic six-step methodology led by a team of four Korean faculty members was used for the translation process. Two nursing faculty members drafted the first version, ensuring alignment with the original content. A bilingual linguist specializing in English-Korean translation reviewed the draft, followed by a speech-language and hearing sciences faculty member who assessed its cultural appropriateness. The translated tool was tested by 10 Korean-speaking participants to evaluate its readability, linguistic and cultural suitability, and accessibility, leading to further refinement. Finally, five Korean American healthcare and academic professionals provided additional inputs, resulting in a beta version of the HEAR-COMMAND Tool-Korean.
resultsThe beta version of the HEAR-COMMAND Tool-Korean was generally found to be feasible, comprehensible, and engaging. Ten of the 15 participants found the items easy to understand, although some had difficulties with specific terms and sentence structures. Notably, 14 of the 15 participants reported that the tool would likely motivate them to seek professional help for hearing concerns.
conclusionsThe translation and cultural adaptation of the HEAR-COMMAND Tool into Korean represents an advancement in addressing the hearing healthcare needs of the Korean population in the USA. Grounded in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), this tool facilitates hearing-related assessments that can be used more broadly among all Korean-speaking individuals worldwide. Future research should validate this tool and examine its impact in clinical and community settings.
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.