LINGUISTIC VALIDATION OF THE RESPIRATORY SYNCYTIAL VIRUS NETWORK (RESVINET) PARENT AND CLINICIAN-FACING QUESTIONNAIRES IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH FOR THE UNITED STATES
Author(s)
King KM, Towns L
ICON Plc, Abingdon, UK
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: The ReSVinet parent and clinician-facing Clinical Outcomes Assessments (COAs) are questionnaires intended to assess the condition of children with Respiratory Syncytial Virus. The original questionnaires were developed in Spain Spanish and required translation and linguistic validation into English and Spanish for the United States. The impact of using non-English source files on the application of the ISPOR Principles of Good Practice (PGP) was reviewed. METHODS: The PGP outline the steps for Linguistic Validation projects but were designed for an English source COA and, consequently, adjustments were required for the following steps: Preparation (reduced scope for COA analysis; no concept elaboration development); Back Translation and Cognitive Debriefing Reviews (reduced scope for project manager involvement in discussions). Once the US English files were finalised, the Spanish for the US could begin following the PGP. This paper compares the changes made in the editing and back translation review steps of the translation process. RESULTS: When editing the English translation, 15% of items required updates to the parent COA, and 17% of the clinician COA items. Of these; 14% were stylistic, 77% were translation errors; and 9% were formatting updates. The Spanish translation required 28% and 12% of items to be updated respectively. Of these; 37% were translation errors; 50% were formatting issues; 9% were to improve consistency; and 4% were to correct an error in the source. During back translation review of the English, 5% and 11% of items were edited respectively (50% were misunderstandings of the source, and 50% were a wrong translation). In the Spanish, these figures were 0% and 1% respectively (25% were to improve consistency, 25% were to correct translation errors while 50% were misunderstandings of original). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates the necessity for full preparation and concept elaboration, ensuring accurate linguistic validation and a reduced need for edits.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2017-05, ISPOR 2017, Boston, MA, USA
Value in Health, Vol. 20, No. 5 (May 2017)
Code
PRM142
Topic
Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
PRO & Related Methods
Disease
Multiple Diseases