221 7 Dutch version of the eHealth Literacy Questionnaire Translation process The original English eHLQ was translated into Dutch following the Translation Integrity Procedure (TIP) set up by the developers. The TIP is a documented systematic translation method that includes the careful specification of descriptions of item intent (55). It includes an item intent matrix describing the intended meaning and conceptual basis of each individual item, and a translation management grid that can be used by the translation team to guide the translation process. Both documents were used to track ambiguities, guide discussions on the nuances of item meanings and identify focus points for further evaluation. The steps are detailed below. Forward translation Two bilingual translators independently translated the original English eHLQ to Dutch, following the item intent guide. The first translator (CP), affiliated to the Leiden University Medical Center and the National eHealth Living Lab (NeLL) was knowledgeable about health and eHealth. The second translator (AR), a certified translator with rich expertise in medical research translation. The individual versions were compared and consensus on an initial translation was reached through discussion. Back translation The initial translation was then translated back to English by an independent translator (MS) who was blinded to the original English version of the questionnaire. The backtranslator was a native English speaker, fluent in Dutch and a linguistic expert. Translation consensus discussion During a first translation consensus team meeting, the back and initial forward translations were compared against the original questionnaire and the item intent. The consensus team was composed of both forward translators (CP and AR), the backward translator (MS), the developer (LK) and an expert team, including two bilingual representatives (EM and PH), both working in health innovation, and a field worker (IM) experienced in questionnaire administration. Any ambiguities and discrepancies were documented and resolved during the meeting. The consensus meeting resulted in a version that was ready for pre-testing and generated a list of items to examine more closely during pre-testing. Study 1: qualitative study The first study aimed to assess validity evidence on test content and response process. Cognitive interviews were performed with a diverse sample of individuals who were considered potential future respondents of the Dutch eHLQ.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw