We aimed to translate and linguistically and cross-culturally validate Sheffield Profile for Assessment and Referral for Care (SPARC) in Spanish for Colombia (SPARC-Sp).

The linguistic validation of SPARC followed a standard methodology. We conducted focus groups to assess the comprehensibility and feasibility. The acceptability was assessed using a survey study with potential users.

The comprehensibility assessment showed that additional adjustments to those made during the translation-back-translation process were required to apply SPARC-Sp in rural and low-schooled populations. It also identified the need for alternative administration mechanisms for illiterate people. The acceptability survey showed that potential users found SPARC-Sp as not only acceptable but also highly desirable. However, they desired to expand the number of items in all domains.

Beyond the semantic and conceptual validity attained through the back-translation process, actual cultural validity could be acquired thanks to the comprehensibility tests. Although extending the instrument is something potential users would like to do, it would make it less feasible to utilize the SPARC-Sp in clinical settings. Nonetheless, the instrument might benefit from the inclusion of a domain that evaluates challenges encountered when accessing the health-care system. For communities lacking literacy, alternate administration methods must also be considered.

This study aimed to validate the Japanese versions of the Trust in Oncologist Scale (TiOS-J) and the TiOS-Short Form (TiOS-SF-J).

A cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted among cancer patients in Japan. The forward-backward translation method was used to develop the TiOS-J. The web-based survey was mailed to 633 people, of whom 309 responded. After 2 weeks, 103 among the 156 first-time respondents completed the second survey to verify the reliability of the retest method. The validity was evaluated by exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Spearman’s correlation coefficients between the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire-Japanese, willingness to recommend the oncologist, trust in health care, and number of oncological consultations. To evaluate reliability, Cronbach’s α and test–retest correlation were calculated.

The theoretically driven four-factor model and the EFA-driven one-factor model of the full-form TiOS-J (18 items) did not result in an acceptable fit; however, CFA supported the one-dimensionality of the 5 items from the TiOS-SF-J (χ2 (5) = 12.36, p = 0.03, goodness-of-fit index = 0.984, adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.952, comparative fit index = 0.991, and root mean square error of approximation = 0.069). With regard to the reliability of TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J, the Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.94 and 0.89, respectively; the test–retest values were 0.82 and 0.78.

This study indicated that the TiOS-J and TiOS-SF-J are valid and reliable instruments for measuring patients’ trust in their oncologists and can be used to assess trust in oncologists for both clinical and research purposes.

In Mongolia, social, demographic, and geographic factors have heightened the need for a reliable means to assess social isolation of older adults. The purpose of this study was to identify, translate, and validate such a measure.

The study was conducted in two phases: translation and back translation of the 18-item Lubben Social Network Scale to Mongolian (LSNS-18-M) and field testing to establish reliability and validity and to explore potential cut-off points. The sample comprised 198 Mongolians aged ≥55 years selected from six hospitals in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

Internal consistency and intraclass correlations for the LSNS-18-M were excellent, indicating high reliability. The scale showed strong convergence with social disconnectedness and perceived isolation scales and with the Geriatric Depression Scale. It was also inversely related to self-rated health status, but not to the physical or mental health subscales of the Short Form-12 (SF-12) survey. The LSNS-18-M scores discriminated among three levels of social disconnectedness and three levels of perceived isolation. Regarding content validity, the 18 items loaded cleanly on the same three factors as the original LSNS-18, inter-factor correlations were good, all factors were correlated with the LSNS-18-M, and they accounted for two-thirds of variance in scores.

The LSNS-18-M had excellent reliability and good validity with a sample of older Mongolians and should be useful for screening, assessment, and monitoring social isolation. Future studies should examine lack of association with the SF-12 and should assess the scale's use with non-hospitalized and non-urban older adults in Mongolia and with Mongolian speakers outside the country.