Author Affiliations: School of Nursing (Ms Lei, Dr Chen, Dr Brecht, and Dr Lee), and Fielding School of Public Health (Dr Zhang), University of California at Los Angeles.
Cancer Nurs. 2022;45(5):387-396. doi: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000001007. Epub 2021 Sep 3.
The uptake of cancer screening is significantly associated with participants' health beliefs about cancer screening. Scales measuring health beliefs of cancer screening are available; however, the scales that were developed and validated for the US population may lack cultural appropriateness, which could compromise the reliability and validity of the scales when applied to different ethnic groups or populations.
The aim of this study was to summarize, analyze, and compare the methods used in the cross-cultural instrument adaptation and validation processes of health beliefs about cancer screening.
A systematic review design with narrative methods was used. Electronic databases, including PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, were searched.
A total of 18 articles were eligible. Results showed (1) the translation methods included committee translation and back translation, which were further refined by using professional translators, using professional interpreters and/or involving the first author, using bilingual individuals, and involving bilingual investigators; (2) the modification methods included embedded and afterward modification; and (3) the validation methods included testing construct validity, internal consistency reliability, item-total subscale correlations, test-retest reliability, content validity, predictive validity, and face validity.
Back translation and afterward modification were most frequently used for translating existing instruments to another language. Validity and reliability were most frequently established by construct validity, content validity, face validity, predictive validity, internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability, and item-total subscale correlation after instruments were translated.
Clinicians should evaluate the translation and adaptation process for translated versions of instruments before using them to provide culturally appropriate and sensitive care.
癌症筛查的接受程度与参与者对癌症筛查的健康信念显著相关。有用于测量癌症筛查健康信念的量表,但为美国人群开发和验证的量表可能缺乏文化适宜性,这可能会降低这些量表在应用于不同种族或人群时的可靠性和有效性。
本研究旨在总结、分析和比较癌症筛查健康信念的跨文化量表改编和验证过程中使用的方法。
采用系统综述设计和叙述方法。检索了电子数据库,包括 PubMed、Google Scholar、CINAHL 和 PsycINFO。
共有 18 篇文章符合条件。结果表明:(1)翻译方法包括委员会翻译和回译,进一步由专业翻译人员、专业口译员和/或第一作者、双语个人和双语研究人员进行完善;(2)修改方法包括嵌入式和之后的修改;(3)验证方法包括测试结构有效性、内部一致性可靠性、项目总分亚量表相关性、测试重测可靠性、内容有效性、预测有效性和表面有效性。
回译和之后的修改是将现有量表翻译成另一种语言最常用的方法。在翻译后的量表中,最常通过结构有效性、内容有效性、表面有效性、预测有效性、内部一致性可靠性、测试重测可靠性和项目总分亚量表相关性来建立有效性和可靠性。
临床医生在使用经过翻译的工具之前,应评估其翻译和改编过程,以提供文化上适当和敏感的护理。