cross-cultural

跨文化
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    方法:跨文化适应的系统综述。
    目的:SOSGOQ2.0被广泛用于评估脊柱转移患者的HRQQOL。由于缺乏方法学质量评价,在常规实践中使用问卷是一个挑战。本研究旨在根据COSMIN指南全面评估SOSGOQ2.0的翻译程序和测量属性。
    方法:根据PRISMA指南对文献进行综述。每个翻译过程和不同的文化适应方法根据指南的跨文化适应过程的自我报告措施进行分类,并根据健康测量工具的选择标准,根据共识对已确定研究的方法学质量进行评估。
    结果:6篇出版物最终符合纳入标准。至于翻译程序和跨文化适应性的评估,两个改编没有报告翻译和跨文化适应方面的详细信息(综合,回译,专家委员会审查,预测试),因子分析和样本量计算只在两项研究中提到,只有一个适应符合最小样本量标准。关于测量属性的方法学质量评估,所有改编都完成了内部一致性,结构有效性和可靠性。然而,没有适应报告测量误差,只有一个报告响应灵敏度。
    结论:我们发现当前适应的方法学质量参差不齐,测量属性结果报告不全面。我们推荐更高质量的德语,意大利和中国适应。
    METHODS: systematic review of cross-cultural adaptation.
    OBJECTIVE: SOSGOQ 2.0 was widely used to assess the HRQQOL of patients with spinal metastasis. Due to the lack of methodological quality assessment, it is a challenge to use the questionnaire in routine practice. This study aims to comprehensively evaluate the translation procedures and measurement attributes of SOSGOQ 2.0 according to COSMIN guidelines.
    METHODS: The literature was reviewed adhering to the PRISMA guidelines. Each translation process and different cultural adaptation methods were classified according to the guidelines for Cross cultural Adaptation Process of Self Reporting Measures, and the methodological quality of the identified research was evaluated according to the consensus based on the selection criteria of health measurement tools.
    RESULTS: 6 publications finally met the inclusion criteria. As for the evaluation of translation procedures and cross-cultural adaptability, two adaptations did not report the detailed information in translation and cross-cultural adaptation (synthesis, back translation, review by expert committee, pre-test), factor analysis and sample size calculation were only mentioned in two studies, and only one adaptation met the minimum sample size standard. Regard to the methodological quality assessment of measurement attributes, all adaptations completed internal consistency, structural effectiveness and reliability. However, none of the adaptations reported measurement errors and only one reported response sensitivity.
    CONCLUSIONS: We found that the methodological quality of the current adaptation was uneven, and the report of measurement attribute results was not comprehensive. We recommend higher quality German, Italian and Chinese adaptation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: Ethnic minorities in countries such as the UK are at increased risk of dementia or minor cognitive impairment. Despite this, cognitive tests used to provide a timely diagnosis for these conditions demonstrate performance bias in these groups, because of cultural context. They require adaptation that accounts for language and culture beyond translation. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) is one such test that has been adapted for multiple cultures.
    OBJECTIVE: We followed previously used methodology for culturally adapting cognitive tests to develop guidelines for translating and culturally adapting the MoCA.
    METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of publications on different versions of the MoCA. We extracted their translation and cultural adaptation procedures. We also distributed questionnaires to adaptors of the MoCA for data on the procedures they undertook to culturally adapt their respective versions.
    RESULTS: Our scoping review found 52 publications and highlighted seven steps for translating the MoCA. We received 17 responses from adaptors on their cultural adaptation procedures, with rationale justifying them. We combined data from the scoping review and the adaptors\' feedback to form the guidelines that state how each question of the MoCA has been previously adapted for different cultural contexts and the reasoning behind it.
    CONCLUSIONS: This paper details our development of cultural adaptation guidelines for the MoCA that future adaptors can use to adapt the MoCA for their own languages or cultures. It also replicates methods previously used and demonstrates how these methods can be used for the cultural adaptation of other cognitive tests.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本研究探讨了韩国人和欧美人之间虚假共识效应(FCE)的文化差异。两项研究采用了传统的错误共识范式,并在三种不同类别的个人选择(研究1)和涉及假设冲突情况的行为选择(研究2)中调查了两种文化之间FCE的相对程度。在两种文化中都观察到了FCE,并且在韩国人中的影响往往比欧洲裔美国人更强。然而,研究1的结果还表明,这种文化效应取决于选择的领域。讨论了文化含义。
    This study explored the cultural differences in the false consensus effect (FCE) between Koreans and European Americans. Two studies adopted a traditional false consensus paradigm and investigated the relative magnitude of the FCE between the two cultures in three different categories of personal choices (Study 1) and behavioral choices involving hypothetical conflict situations (Study 2). The FCE was observed in both the cultures and the effect tended to be stronger among Koreans than European Americans. However, the results from Study 1 also demonstrated that this cultural effect depends on the domain of choices. Cultural implications were discussed.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号