Rationale, aims and objectives The diversity of the population worldwide suggests a great need for cross-culturally validated research instruments or scales. Researchers and clinicians must have access to reliable and valid measures of concepts of interest in their own cultures and languages to conduct cross-cultural research and/or provide quality patient care. Although there are well-established methodological approaches for translating, adapting and validating instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research, a great variation in the use of these approaches continues to prevail in the health care literature. Therefore, the objectives of this scholarly paper were to review published recommendations of cross-cultural validation of instruments and scales, and to propose and present a clear and user-friendly guideline for the translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for cross-cultural health care research. Methods A review of highly recommended methodological approaches to translation, adaptation and cross-cultural validation of research instruments or scales was performed. Recommendations were summarized and incorporated into a seven-step guideline. Each one of the steps was described and key points were highlighted. Example of a project using the proposed steps of the guideline was fully described. Conclusions Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for crosscultural research is very time-consuming and requires careful planning and the adoption of rigorous methodological approaches to derive a reliable and valid measure of the concept of interest in the target population.

Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross‐cultural health care research: a clear and user‐friendly guideline

Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force.

Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2--assessing respondent understanding.

Purpose
An essential aspect of patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) and comparative effectiveness research (CER) is the integration of patient perspectives and experiences with clinical data to evaluate interventions. Thus, PCOR and CER require capturing patient-reported outcome (PRO) data appropriately to inform research, healthcare delivery, and policy. This initiative’s goal was to identify minimum standards for the design and selection of a PRO measure for use in PCOR and CER.

/pdf/isoqol-recommends-minimum-standards-for-patient-reported-59ij0jyk79.pdf

ISOQOL recommends minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures used in patient-centered outcomes and comparative effectiveness research

OBJECTIVE
To estimate and compare the prevalence and associated bother of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in the general populations of the USA, UK and Sweden using current International Continence Society (ICS) definitions, as no previous population-based studies evaluating the prevalence of LUTS in the USA, using the 2002 ICS definitions, have been conducted.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS
This cross-sectional, population-representative survey was conducted via the Internet in the USA, the UK and Sweden. Members of Internet-based panels were randomly selected to receive an e-mailed invitation to participate. If interested, respondents selected a link to an informed consent page, followed by the survey. Participants were asked to rate how often they experienced individual LUTS during the previous 4 weeks, on a five-point Likert scale, and, if experienced, how much the symptom bothered them. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize and present the data.

RESULTS
Responses rates for the USA, the UK and Sweden were 59.6%, 60.6% and 52.3%, respectively, with a final sample of 30 000 (USA 20 000; UK 7500; Sweden 2500). The mean age (range) of the participants was 56.6 (40–99) years; the mean percentages for race were 82.9% white, 6.7% black, 6.0% Hispanic and 4.4% Asian/other. The prevalence of LUTS was defined by two symptom frequency thresholds, i.e. at least ‘sometimes’ and at least ‘often’ for all LUTS except incontinence, where frequency thresholds were at least ‘a few times per month’ and at least ‘a few times per week’. The prevalence of at least one LUTS at least ‘sometimes’ was 72.3% for men and 76.3% for women, and 47.9% and 52.5% for at least ‘often’ for men and women, respectively. For most LUTS, at least half of the participants were bothered ‘somewhat’ or more using a frequency threshold of at least ‘sometimes’. For a threshold of at least ‘often’, ‘somewhat’ or more bother was reported by ≥70% of participants except for terminal dribble in men and split stream in women.

CONCLUSION
In this large population study of three countries, LUTS are highly prevalent among men and women aged >40 years. In general, LUTS experienced ‘often’ or more are bothersome to most people.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08427.x

The prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in the USA, the UK and Sweden: results from the Epidemiology of LUTS (EpiLUTS) study.

http://www.hrainc.net/publications/pdfs/2005%20Wild%20VIH%20-%20PRO-SIG.pdf

Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation.

A Methodology for Successfully Producing Global Translations of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Use in Multiple Countries

PRM64 The Role of the Instrument Developer in the Translation of Patient Reported Outcome Measures

Pmc51 concept elaboration—an essential stage in the translation of pro measures

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00716.x

A. Verjee-Lorenz

Papers

Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation.

A Methodology for Successfully Producing Global Translations of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for Use in Multiple Countries

PRM64 The Role of the Instrument Developer in the Translation of Patient Reported Outcome Measures

Pmc51 concept elaboration—an essential stage in the translation of pro measures

Response to the Letter from Ms. Tamzin Furtado