Cited by 6,060Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Education and ValidationPsychometric Methodologies and Testing

Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines

Guillemin, Francis, Bombardier, Claire, Beaton, Dorcas·1993·Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Abstract

Clinicians and researchers without a suitable health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measure in their own language have two choices: (1) to develop a new measure, or (2) to modify a measure previously validated in another language, known as a cross-cultural adaptation process. We propose a set of standardized guidelines for this process based on previous research in psychology and sociology and on published methodological frameworks. These guidelines include recommendations for obtaining semantic, idiomatic, experiential and conceptual equivalence in translation by using back-translation techniques and committee review, pre-testing techniques and re-examining the weight of scores. We applied these guidelines to 17 cross-cultural adaptation of HRQOL measures identified through a comprehensive literature review. The reporting standards varied across studies but agreement between raters in their ratings of the studies was substantial to almost perfect (weighted kappa = 0.66-0.93) suggesting that the guidelines are easy to apply. Further research is necessary in order to delineate essential versus optional steps in the adaptation process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-n

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1993-12
Volume
46
Issue
12
Pages
1417-1432
ISSN
0895-4356 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2150377764
Cited by
6,060
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 208 · 2025: 262 · 2024: 300 · 2023: 307 · 2022: 312 · 2021: 360 · 2020: 379 · 2019: 344 · 2018: 325 · 2017: 306 · 2016: 263 · 2015: 301 · 2014: 305 · 2013: 270 · 2012: 262
FWCI
41.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
cross-cultural adaptation, health-related quality of life, back-translation, semantic equivalence, conceptual equivalence, idiomatic equivalence, adaptation guidelines, psychometric validation, reporting guidelines
MeSH terms
Cross-Cultural Comparison, Cultural Characteristics, Health Status Indicators, Humans, Language, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Guidelines as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review