Christine Ml Kwan1, Anna M Napoles2, Jeyling Chou1, Hilary K Seligman1. 1. 1Center for Vulnerable Populations at San Francisco General Hospital;Division of General Internal Medicine,University of California San Francisco,San Francisco,CA 94143,USA. 2. 2Division of General Internal Medicine,University of California San Francisco,San Francisco,CA,USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop a conceptually equivalent Chinese-language translation of the eighteen-item US Household Food Security Survey Module. DESIGN: In the current qualitative study, we (i) highlight methodological challenges which arise in developing survey instruments that will be used to make comparisons across language groups and (ii) describe the development of a Chinese-language translation of the US Household Food Security Survey Module, called the San Francisco Chinese Food Security Module. SETTING: Community sites in San Francisco, CA, USA. SUBJECTS: We conducted cognitive interviews with twenty-two community members recruited from community sites hosting food pantries and with five professionals recruited from clinical settings. RESULTS: Development of conceptually equivalent surveys can be difficult. We highlight challenges related to dialect, education, literacy (e.g. preferences for more or less formal phrasing), English words and phrases for which there is no Chinese language equivalent (e.g. 'balanced meals' and 'eat less than you felt you should') and response formats. We selected final translations to maximize: (i) consistency of the Chinese translation with the intent of the English version; (ii) clarity; and (iii) similarities in understanding across dialects and literacy levels. CONCLUSIONS: Survey translation is essential for conducting research in many communities. The challenges encountered illustrate how literal translations can affect the conceptual equivalence of survey items across languages. Cognitive interview methods should be routinely used for survey translation when such non-equivalence is suspected, such as in surveys addressing highly culturally bound behaviours such as diet and eating behaviours. Literally translated surveys lacking conceptual equivalence may magnify or obscure important health inequalities.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a conceptually equivalent Chinese-language translation of the eighteen-item US Household Food Security Survey Module. DESIGN: In the current qualitative study, we (i) highlight methodological challenges which arise in developing survey instruments that will be used to make comparisons across language groups and (ii) describe the development of a Chinese-language translation of the US Household Food Security Survey Module, called the San Francisco Chinese Food Security Module. SETTING: Community sites in San Francisco, CA, USA. SUBJECTS: We conducted cognitive interviews with twenty-two community members recruited from community sites hosting food pantries and with five professionals recruited from clinical settings. RESULTS: Development of conceptually equivalent surveys can be difficult. We highlight challenges related to dialect, education, literacy (e.g. preferences for more or less formal phrasing), English words and phrases for which there is no Chinese language equivalent (e.g. 'balanced meals' and 'eat less than you felt you should') and response formats. We selected final translations to maximize: (i) consistency of the Chinese translation with the intent of the English version; (ii) clarity; and (iii) similarities in understanding across dialects and literacy levels. CONCLUSIONS: Survey translation is essential for conducting research in many communities. The challenges encountered illustrate how literal translations can affect the conceptual equivalence of survey items across languages. Cognitive interview methods should be routinely used for survey translation when such non-equivalence is suspected, such as in surveys addressing highly culturally bound behaviours such as diet and eating behaviours. Literally translated surveys lacking conceptual equivalence may magnify or obscure important health inequalities.
Authors: Ninez A Ponce; Shana Alex Lavarreda; Wei Yen; E Richard Brown; Charles DiSogra; Delight E Satter Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2004 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.792