文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

美国国家癌症研究所患者报告结局版通用不良事件术语标准(PRO-CTCAE™)简体中文版的语言验证。

Linguistic validation of the simplified Chinese version of the US National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE™).

机构信息

Alice Lee Centre for Nursing Studies, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, USA.

出版信息

BMC Cancer. 2020 Nov 26;20(1):1153. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07631-5.


DOI:10.1186/s12885-020-07631-5
PMID:33243173
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7690028/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to translate and linguistically validate the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™) into Simplified Chinese for use in Singapore. METHODS: All 124 items of the English source PRO-CTCAE item library were translated into Simplified Chinese using internationally established translation procedures. Two rounds of cognitive interviews were conducted with 96 cancer patients undergoing adjuvant treatment to determine if the translations adequately captured the PRO-CTCAE source concepts, and to evaluate comprehension, clarity and ease of judgement. Interview probes addressed the 78 PRO-CTCAE symptom terms (e.g. fatigue), as well as the attributes (e.g. severity), response choices, and phrasing of 'at its worst'. Items that met the a priori threshold of ≥20% of participants with comprehension difficulties were considered for rephrasing and retesting. Items where < 20% of the sample experienced comprehension difficulties were also considered for rephrasing if better phrasing options were available. RESULTS: A majority of PRO-CTCAE-Simplified Chinese items were well comprehended by participants in Round 1. One item posed difficulties in ≥20% and was revised. Two items presented difficulties in < 20% but were revised as there were preferred alternative phrasings. Twenty-four items presented difficulties in < 10% of respondents. Of these, eleven items were revised to an alternative preferred phrasing, four items were revised to include synonyms. Revised items were tested in Round 2 and demonstrated satisfactory comprehension. CONCLUSIONS: PRO-CTCAE-Simplified Chinese has been successfully developed and linguistically validated in a sample of cancer patients residing in Singapore.

摘要

背景:本研究旨在将美国国立癌症研究所的患者报告结局版常见不良事件术语标准(PRO-CTCAE™)翻译成简体中文,以便在新加坡使用。

方法:使用国际公认的翻译程序将英文版 PRO-CTCAE 项目库的 124 个项目全部翻译成简体中文。对 96 名接受辅助治疗的癌症患者进行了两轮认知访谈,以确定翻译是否充分捕捉了 PRO-CTCAE 的来源概念,并评估理解、清晰度和判断的容易程度。访谈探针涉及 78 个 PRO-CTCAE 症状术语(如疲劳),以及属性(如严重程度)、反应选择和“最严重”的措辞。如果有≥20%的参与者理解困难,则认为满足先验阈值的项目需要重新措辞和重新测试。如果有更好的措辞选择,<20%的样本遇到理解困难的项目也可以考虑重新措辞。

结果:大多数 PRO-CTCAE-简体中文项目在第一轮中被参与者很好地理解。一个项目在≥20%的参与者中遇到困难,并进行了修订。有两个项目在<20%的参与者中遇到困难,但由于有更好的措辞选择,因此进行了修订。有 24 个项目在<10%的受访者中遇到困难。其中,11 个项目被修订为替代的首选措辞,4 个项目被修订为包含同义词。修订后的项目在第二轮中进行了测试,结果表明理解令人满意。

结论:PRO-CTCAE-简体中文已在新加坡居住的癌症患者样本中成功开发并进行了语言验证。

相似文献

[1]
Linguistic validation of the simplified Chinese version of the US National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE™).

BMC Cancer. 2020-11-26

[2]
Linguistic Validation of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events in Korean.

J Glob Oncol. 2019-3

[3]
Linguistic validation of the Spanish version of the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Support Care Cancer. 2016-7

[4]
Dutch translation and linguistic validation of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE™).

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2020-10-6

[5]
Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Qual Life Res. 2013-7-20

[6]
Danish Translation and Linguistic Validation of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016-8

[7]
Reliability and Validity of the Korean Language Version of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events.

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020-5

[8]
Cultural adaptation of the Italian version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (PRO-CTCAE®).

Tumori. 2023-6

[9]
Translation Into Simplified Chinese and Cultural Validation of the Pediatric Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Using Cognitive Interviewing.

Cancer Nurs. 2023

[10]
Japanese translation and linguistic validation of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2017

引用本文的文献

[1]
Development and validation of a prediction model for myelosuppression in lung cancer patients after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy: a multifactorial analysis approach.

Am J Cancer Res. 2025-2-15

[2]
Efficacy and safety of combined anlotinib-oral etoposide treatment for patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.

J Gynecol Oncol. 2024-11

[3]
Prognostic Effect of Sarcopenia in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients Targeted with Interventional Therapy Combined with Immunotherapy and Targeted Therapy.

J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 2024-1-24

[4]
Efficacy of TACE Combined with Lenvatinib Plus Sintilimab for Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Tumor Thrombus in the Inferior Vena Cava and/or Right Atrium.

J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 2023-9-13

[5]
Validation testing of a language translation device for suitability in assisting Australian radiation therapists to communicate with Mandarin-speaking patients.

Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2023-4-25

[6]
Validity and reliability of the simplified Chinese patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events.

BMC Cancer. 2021-7-27

本文引用的文献

[1]
The association between clinician-based common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO): a systematic review.

Support Care Cancer. 2016-8

[2]
Danish Translation and Linguistic Validation of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016-8

[3]
Linguistic validation of the Spanish version of the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Support Care Cancer. 2016-7

[4]
Validity and Reliability of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes Version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

JAMA Oncol. 2015-11

[5]
Development of the National Cancer Institute's patient-reported outcomes version of the common terminology criteria for adverse events (PRO-CTCAE).

J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014-9-29

[6]
Linguistic and content validation of a German-language PRO-CTCAE-based patient-reported outcomes instrument to evaluate the late effect symptom experience after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2015-2

[7]
Patient-reported outcomes and survivorship in radiation oncology: overcoming the cons.

J Clin Oncol. 2014-8-11

[8]
Cognitive interviewing of the US National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

Qual Life Res. 2013-7-20

[9]
PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation.

Qual Life Res. 2010-5-30

[10]
Qualitative research and content validity: developing best practices based on science and experience.

Qual Life Res. 2009-9-27

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索