A new tool for assessing the cultural adaptation of cognitive tests: demonstrating the utility of the Manchester Translation Evaluation Checklist (MTEC) through the Mini-Mental State Examination Urdu.

BACKGROUND: Low- and middle-income countries contribute to the majority of dementia and mild cognitive impairment cases worldwide, yet cognitive tests for diagnosis are designed for Western cultures. Language and cultural discrepancies mean that translated tests are not always reliable or valid. We propose a model for culturally adapting cognitive tests, one step of which is to assess the quality of any translation and cultural adaptation undertaken. We developed the Manchester Translation Evaluation Checklist (MTEC) to act as a tool for quality assessment and demonstrated its use by assessing a popular cognitive test that had been adapted. AIMS: Assess quality of the translation and cultural adaptation of the Urdu Mini-Mental State Examination developed for a Pakistani population. METHOD: Two raters completed the MTEC for the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) Urdu and compared feedback. All authors were fluent in English and Urdu and familiar with Pakistani culture. RESULTS: Raters had 78.5% agreement across the MTEC. The MMSE Urdu was appropriately translated and retained grammar and verb tense, but three questions had spelling errors. Across 20 MMSE questions, 5 required further cultural adaptation because the questions were not understandable in daily use, comfortable to answer, relevant to the language and culture, and relevant to original concepts. CONCLUSIONS: The MTEC highlighted errors in the MMSE Urdu and demonstrated how this tool can be used to improve it. Future studies could employ the MTEC to improve existing translated measures of health assessment, particularly cognitive tests, and act as a quality check when developing new adaptations of tests and before psychometric validation.

Developing and implementing guidelines on culturally adapting the Addenbrooke's cognitive examination version III (ACE-III): a qualitative illustration.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive tests currently used in healthcare and research settings do not account for bias in performance that arises due to cultural context. At present there are no universally accepted steps or minimum criteria for culturally adapting cognitive tests. We propose a methodology for developing specific guidelines to culturally adapt a specific cognitive test and used this to develop guidelines for the ACE-III. We then demonstrated their implementation by using them to produce an ACE-III Urdu for a British South Asian population. METHODS: This was a several stage qualitative study. We combined information from our systematic review on the translation and cultural adaptation of the ACE-III with feedback from previous ACE-III adaptors. This identified steps for cultural adaptation. We formatted these into question-by-question guidelines. These guidelines, along with feedback from focus groups with potential users were used to develop ACE-III Urdu questions. Clinical experts reviewed these questions to finalise an ACE-III Urdu. RESULTS: Our systematic review found 32 adaptations and we received feedback from seven adaptors to develop the guidelines. With these guidelines and two focus groups with 12 participants a sample ACE-III Urdu was developed. A consensus meeting of two psychiatrists with a South Asian background and familiarity with cognitive tests and cultural adaptation finalised the ACE-III Urdu. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a set of guidelines for culturally adapting the ACE-III that can be used by future adaptors for their own language or cultural context. We demonstrated how guidelines on cultural adaptation can be developed for any cognitive test and how they can be used to adapt it.

Recruitment and methodological issues in conducting dementia research in British ethnic minorities: A qualitative systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Identifying existing recruitment and methodological issues within dementia research conducted in UK studies that included ethnic minorities. METHODS: We searched for and included any publication detailing dementia research in the UK that included any ethnic minority. The search results and all titles and abstracts were screened according to the inclusion criteria followed by screening of the full texts. We extracted data regarding the recruitment and methodological issues faced by the researchers. This data was combined and listed, and related issues were grouped into overarching themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Of 52 publications suitable for analysis, 33 provided data collated into six themes: attitudes and beliefs about dementia in ethnic minority communities, recruitment process, data collection issues, practical issues, researcher characteristics, and lack of published research and normative data. These themes allowed us to identify three areas responsible for addressing these recruitment and methodological issues: community and patient education, health services, and researchers' training. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first review identifying recruitment and methodological issues within UK dementia research that included ethnic minorities. We now have a compilation of reported existing issues and a framework of areas responsible for addressing them and devising solutions.