Skip to main content
. 2011 Jun 6;11:87. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-87

Table 1.

Methodological criteria for the translation process and cross-cultural validation [9]

Item Methodological Criteria
1 Was the percentage of missing items given?
2 Was there a description of how missing items were handled?
3 Was the sample size included in the analysis adequate?
4 Were both the original language in which the HR-PRO instrument was developed,
and the language in which the HR-PRO instrument was translated described?
5 Was the expertise of the people involved in the translation process adequately described?
e.g. expertise in the disease(s) involved, in the construct to be measured, or in both languages
6 Did the translators work independently from each other?
7 Were items translated forward and backward?
8 Was there an adequate description of how differences between the original and
translated versions were resolved?
9 Was the translation reviewed by a committee (e.g. original developers)?
10 Was the HR-PRO instrument pre-tested (e.g. cognitive interviews) to check interpretation,
cultural relevance of the translation, and ease of comprehension?
11 Was the sample used in the pre-test adequately described?
12 Were the samples similar for all characteristics except language and/or cultural background?
13 Were there any important flaws in the design or methods of the study?
14 for CTT: Was confirmatory factor analysis performed?
15 for IRT: Was differential item function (DIF) between language groups assessed?

CTT = Classical Test Theory, IRT = Item Response Theory