Cited by 265Health Education and ValidationSurvey Methodology and NonresponsePsychometric Methodologies and Testing

. A systematic survey instrument translation process for multi-country, comparative health workforce studies.

Open access
Squires, Allison, Aiken, Linda H., van den Heede, Koen, Sermeus, Walter, Bruyneel, Luk, Lindqvist, Rikard, Schoonhoven, Lisette, Stromseng, Ingeborg +8 more·2013·International Journal of Nursing Studies

Abstract

Background As health services research (HSR) expands across the globe, researchers will adopt health services and health worker evaluation instruments developed in one country for use in another. This paper explores the cross-cultural methodological challenges involved in translating HSR in the language and context of different health systems.Objectives To describe the pre-data collection systematic translation process used in a twelve country, eleven language nursing workforce survey.Design and settings We illustrate the potential advantages of Content Validity Indexing (CVI) techniques to validate a nursing workforce survey developed for RN4CAST, a twelve country (Belgium, England, Finland, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland), eleven language (with modifications for regional dialects, including Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Spanish, and Swedish), comparative nursing workforce study in Europe.Participants Expert review panels comprised of practicing nurses from twelve European countries who evaluated cross-cultural relevance, including translation, of a nursing workforce survey instrument developed by experts in the field.Methods The method described in this paper used Content Validity Indexing (CVI) techniques with chance correction and provides researchers with a systematic approach for standardizing language translation processes while simultaneously evaluating the cross-cultural applicability of a survey instrument in the new context.Results The cross-cultural evaluation process produced CVI scores for the instrument ranging from .61 to .95. The process successfully identified potentially problematic survey items and errors with translation.Conclusions The translation approach described here may help researchers reduce threats to data validity and improve instrument reliability in multinational health services research studies involving comparisons across health systems and language translation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2012.02.015

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Grant JS Davis LL Selection and use of content experts for instrument development Research in Nursing and Health 1997 20 269 274 9179180
  2. Maslach C Schaufeli WB Leiter MP Job burnout Annual Review of Psychology 2001 52 397 422 11148311
  3. Reichenheim ME Moraes CL Operationalizing the cross-cultural adaptation of epidemiological measurement instruments Revista de Saude Publica 2007 41 4 665 73 17589768

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Squires, A., Aiken, L. H., van den Heede, K., Sermeus, W., Bruyneel, L., Lindqvist, R., Schoonhoven, L., Stromseng, I., Busse, R., Brzostek, T., Ensio, A., Moreno-Casbas, M., Rafferty, A. M., Schubert, M., Zikos, D., & Matthews, A.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • Technische Universität Berlin (DE)
  • Jagiellonian University (PL)
  • University of Eastern Finland (FI)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
  • Dublin City University (IE)
Corresponding author
Squires, Allison
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-02
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
264-273
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2017571303
Cited by
265
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
62.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Homo Politicus (Academy of Humanities and Economics in Lodz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Jagiellonian University Repository (Jagiellonian University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (P30NR05043)
  • Seventh Framework Programme (223468)
  • European Commission
  • National Institute of Nursing Research
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Health Education and Validation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
Keywords
cross-cultural adaptation, RN4CAST, expert panel review, instrument validation
MeSH terms
Data Collection, Nursing Staff, Translating, Internationality

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