Systematic review examines translation quality of adaptive behaviour measures across cultures, suggesting future research directions.
Objective This systematic review examines the quality of the translation and adaptation of adaptive behaviour measures into other languages, dialects, and cultures, and the reported validity of these adapted measures.Method A systematic review of the literature was conducted on 6th March 2024 using OVID Databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO) and EBSCOhost (ERIC). Peer-reviewed studies and theses examining the translation and adaptation of existing English measures of adaptive behaviour into a new language or dialect were included. The methodological quality of the translation was evaluated using QUADAS and COSMIN guidance, and psychometric properties were narratively synthesised.Results Twenty-two papers from 19 different countries were reviewed, covering five adaptive behaviour measures. The translation process and quality varied significantly across available versions. Synthesis revealed that a broad range of psychometric properties were examined across studies, with limited evidence of three-factor construct validity for the adapted scales. Various types of validity were assessed in 20 studies, including construct, concurrent, content, and discriminant validity.Conclusion Overall quality of translation and adaptation was moderate, with limitations evident in the back translation and in piloting the questionnaire before validation. Psychometric properties varied across studies but indicated greater support for a single-factor construct of adaptive behaviour over a multi-factor construct. Implications for future research are suggested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
McCabe et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: