Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations
Do you wish to request the book?
Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations
2010
Overview
Background
Research questionnaires are not always translated appropriately before they are used in new temporal, cultural or linguistic settings. The results based on such instruments may therefore not accurately reflect what they are supposed to measure. This paper aims to illustrate the process and required steps involved in the cross-cultural adaptation of a research instrument using the adaptation process of an attitudinal instrument as an example.
Methods
A questionnaire was needed for the implementation of a study in Norway 2007. There was no appropriate instruments available in Norwegian, thus an Australian-English instrument was cross-culturally adapted.
Results
The adaptation process included investigation of conceptual and item equivalence. Two forward and two back-translations were synthesized and compared by an expert committee. Thereafter the instrument was pretested and adjusted accordingly. The final questionnaire was administered to opioid maintenance treatment staff (n=140) and harm reduction staff (n=180). The overall response rate was 84%. The original instrument failed confirmatory analysis. Instead a new two-factor scale was identified and found valid in the new setting.
Conclusions
The failure of the original scale highlights the importance of adapting instruments to current research settings. It also emphasizes the importance of ensuring that concepts within an instrument are equal between the original and target language, time and context. If the described stages in the cross-cultural adaptation process had been omitted, the findings would have been misleading, even if presented with apparent precision. Thus, it is important to consider possible barriers when making a direct comparison between different nations, cultures and times.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,BMC
Subject
/ Attitude of Health Personnel
/ Culture
/ Factor Analysis, Statistical
/ Humans
/ Language
/ Medicine
/ Methods
/ Norway
/ Statistical Theory and Methods
/ Statistics for Life Sciences
/ Substance-Related Disorders - drug therapy
/ Substance-Related Disorders - psychology
