Swaine-Verdier Angelo, Doward Lynda C, Hagell Peter, Thorsen Hanne, McKenna Stephen P
Freelance translator, Chevalet, Mazerat-Aurouze, France.
Value Health. 2004 Sep-Oct;7 Suppl 1:S27-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2004.7s107.x.
Due to the international nature of many clinical studies and trials it is often necessary to produce several language versions of specific measures. While it is generally acknowledged that it is necessary to produce versions that are conceptually equivalent, the best method of achieving this is more controversial. It is commonly stated that there is a gold-standard method, which involves forward and backward translation. However, no evidence has been presented to support this view. This paper argues that the "gold-standard" method is difficult to support and describes an alternative method involving dual translation panels that has been used in the production of all adaptations of needs-based quality of life instruments.
由于许多临床研究和试验具有国际性,往往需要针对特定测量工具制作多种语言版本。虽然人们普遍认为有必要制作概念上等效的版本,但实现这一目标的最佳方法更具争议性。人们通常称有一种金标准方法,即进行正向和反向翻译。然而,尚未有证据支持这一观点。本文认为“金标准”方法难以成立,并描述了一种替代方法,即使用双重翻译小组,该方法已用于基于需求的生活质量工具的所有改编版本制作中。