Assessing the use of back translation: the shortcomings of back translation as a quality testing method

Abstract Back translation – the ‘re-translation’ of a translated questionnaire back into the original language and the subsequent comparison of the original version and the back translation – is a controversial assessment method for questionnaire translations. Recently, cross-cultural survey methodologists have followed the call for more empirical research on this method. This article adds to the small body of research by drawing on the back translation documentation from the 2012 European Quality of Life Survey (EQLS). First, results from the official EQLS back translation step are contrasted with results when additional persons perform the same comparison step between back translation and original. We note inconsistency in the detection of presumed flaws. Second, the back translation outcome is contrasted with additional native speaker checks of the actual translation. While back translation can uncover problems, it causes quite a number of false alarms, and even more importantly, many problems remain hidden.

[1]  David M Meads,et al.  Effects of method of translation of patient-reported health outcome questionnaires: a randomized study of the translation of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life (RAQoL) Instrument for Sweden. , 2010, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[2]  K. Alghamdi,et al.  Arabic version of Skindex‐16: Translation and cultural adaptation, with assessment of reliability and validity , 2007, International journal of dermatology.

[3]  D. Wild,et al.  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. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[4]  Gijs van Houten,et al.  Questionnaire translation in the European Company Survey: Conditions conducive to the effective implementation of a TRAPD-based approach , 2018, The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research.

[5]  B. Pennell,et al.  Survey Questionnaire Translation and Assessment , 2004 .

[6]  C. Bombardier,et al.  Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. , 2000, Spine.

[7]  J. Dixon,et al.  Instrument translation process: a methods review. , 2004, Journal of advanced nursing.

[8]  Sally A. Shumaker,et al.  The international assessment of health-related quality of life : theory, translation, measurement and analysis , 1995 .

[9]  Michael Braun,et al.  An Illustrative Review of Techniques for Detecting Inequivalences , 2010 .

[10]  R. Brislin The wording and translation of research instruments. , 1986 .

[11]  Catherine Acquadro,et al.  Literature review of methods to translate health-related quality of life questionnaires for use in multinational clinical trials. , 2008, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  Hanne Thorsen,et al.  Adapting quality of life instruments. , 2004, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[13]  Lynda C Doward,et al.  The translation and cultural adaptation of patient-reported outcome measures. , 2005, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[14]  R. Brislin Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research , 1970 .