电子临床结果评估翻译的良好实践原则。

IF 2.4 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Huda Shalhoub, M Turner, A Bradley-Gilbride, S Eremenco, H Muehlan, E Parks-Vernizzi, B Arnold, D Kuliś, C Anfray, J E Chaplin, J P Repo
{"title":"电子临床结果评估翻译的良好实践原则。","authors":"Huda Shalhoub, M Turner, A Bradley-Gilbride, S Eremenco, H Muehlan, E Parks-Vernizzi, B Arnold, D Kuliś, C Anfray, J E Chaplin, J P Repo","doi":"10.1186/s41687-025-00859-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While many publications have outlined good practice recommendations for translation and electronic implementation of clinical outcome assessments (COAs), they are often treated as independent processes. The scientific literature currently lacks recommended guidelines on the process of concurrent translation, cultural adaptation and electronic implementation of COAs for clinical research. In response to this need, the ISOQOL Translation and Cultural Adaptation Special Interest Group (TCA-SIG) sought to identify actionable steps for addressing the scientific and operational intricacies in this concurrent process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using snowball sampling, semi-structured questions were sent to language service providers (LSPs), electronic clinical outcome assessment (eCOA) providers, and developers/copyright holders. The TCA-SIG workgroup, consisting of 13 members, then led the methodological groundwork for the disseminated surveys and established a cohesive set of recommendations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The collective feedback that led to the recommendations included a total of 30 experts who responded to the surveys. Most of the respondents worked in companies or represented organizations based in the US and Europe.</p><p><strong>Recommendations: </strong>The recommendations fall into two main categories: namely, operational and scientific. The operational recommendations consist of active involvement from all stakeholders, the communication of clear expectations from the start, and better clarification of timelines of LSPs involved. Examples of scientific recommendations are electronic language feasibility assessment (ELFA), screenshot proofreading, as well as COA-specific developer and copyright holder guidelines for electronic implementation. COA-specific guidelines and instructions for electronic implementation and evaluation were seen to be needed and key recommendations are discussed in detail in this paper.</p>","PeriodicalId":36660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","volume":"9 1","pages":"26"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11880485/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Principles of good practice for translation of electronic clinical outcome assessments.\",\"authors\":\"Huda Shalhoub, M Turner, A Bradley-Gilbride, S Eremenco, H Muehlan, E Parks-Vernizzi, B Arnold, D Kuliś, C Anfray, J E Chaplin, J P Repo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s41687-025-00859-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While many publications have outlined good practice recommendations for translation and electronic implementation of clinical outcome assessments (COAs), they are often treated as independent processes. The scientific literature currently lacks recommended guidelines on the process of concurrent translation, cultural adaptation and electronic implementation of COAs for clinical research. In response to this need, the ISOQOL Translation and Cultural Adaptation Special Interest Group (TCA-SIG) sought to identify actionable steps for addressing the scientific and operational intricacies in this concurrent process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using snowball sampling, semi-structured questions were sent to language service providers (LSPs), electronic clinical outcome assessment (eCOA) providers, and developers/copyright holders. The TCA-SIG workgroup, consisting of 13 members, then led the methodological groundwork for the disseminated surveys and established a cohesive set of recommendations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The collective feedback that led to the recommendations included a total of 30 experts who responded to the surveys. Most of the respondents worked in companies or represented organizations based in the US and Europe.</p><p><strong>Recommendations: </strong>The recommendations fall into two main categories: namely, operational and scientific. The operational recommendations consist of active involvement from all stakeholders, the communication of clear expectations from the start, and better clarification of timelines of LSPs involved. Examples of scientific recommendations are electronic language feasibility assessment (ELFA), screenshot proofreading, as well as COA-specific developer and copyright holder guidelines for electronic implementation. COA-specific guidelines and instructions for electronic implementation and evaluation were seen to be needed and key recommendations are discussed in detail in this paper.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"26\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11880485/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00859-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-025-00859-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然许多出版物概述了临床结果评估(coa)的翻译和电子实施的良好实践建议,但它们通常被视为独立的过程。科学文献目前缺乏关于临床研究coa的并发翻译、文化适应和电子实施过程的推荐指南。为了应对这一需求,ISOQOL翻译和文化适应特别兴趣小组(TCA-SIG)试图确定可行的步骤,以解决这一并发过程中科学和操作上的复杂性。方法:采用滚雪球抽样的方法,将半结构化问题发送给语言服务提供商(LSPs)、电子临床结果评估(eCOA)提供商和开发人员/版权所有者。由13名成员组成的TCA-SIG工作组随后领导了传播调查的方法基础工作,并建立了一套有凝聚力的建议。结果:导致建议的集体反馈包括对调查作出回应的总共30名专家。大多数受访者在美国和欧洲的公司工作或代表组织。建议:建议主要分为两类:即业务建议和科学建议。业务建议包括所有利益攸关方的积极参与,从一开始就传达明确的期望,以及更好地澄清所涉及的lsp的时间表。科学建议的例子包括电子语言可行性评估(ELFA)、屏幕截图校对以及特定于coa的开发人员和版权所有者的电子实施指南。认为有必要为电子实施和评价制定具体的指导方针和说明,并在本文中详细讨论了主要建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Principles of good practice for translation of electronic clinical outcome assessments.

Background: While many publications have outlined good practice recommendations for translation and electronic implementation of clinical outcome assessments (COAs), they are often treated as independent processes. The scientific literature currently lacks recommended guidelines on the process of concurrent translation, cultural adaptation and electronic implementation of COAs for clinical research. In response to this need, the ISOQOL Translation and Cultural Adaptation Special Interest Group (TCA-SIG) sought to identify actionable steps for addressing the scientific and operational intricacies in this concurrent process.

Methods: Using snowball sampling, semi-structured questions were sent to language service providers (LSPs), electronic clinical outcome assessment (eCOA) providers, and developers/copyright holders. The TCA-SIG workgroup, consisting of 13 members, then led the methodological groundwork for the disseminated surveys and established a cohesive set of recommendations.

Results: The collective feedback that led to the recommendations included a total of 30 experts who responded to the surveys. Most of the respondents worked in companies or represented organizations based in the US and Europe.

Recommendations: The recommendations fall into two main categories: namely, operational and scientific. The operational recommendations consist of active involvement from all stakeholders, the communication of clear expectations from the start, and better clarification of timelines of LSPs involved. Examples of scientific recommendations are electronic language feasibility assessment (ELFA), screenshot proofreading, as well as COA-specific developer and copyright holder guidelines for electronic implementation. COA-specific guidelines and instructions for electronic implementation and evaluation were seen to be needed and key recommendations are discussed in detail in this paper.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes Health Professions-Health Information Management
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
7.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信