PMC50 TRANSLATION, LINGUISTIC VALIDATION AND ELECTRONIC ADMINISTRATION IN THE INDIAN LANGUAGES: A CASE STUDY HIGHLIGHTING THE SPECIAL DIFFICULTIES THAT EXIST AT THIS INTERSECTION

To explore the categories of comprehension diffi culties and their prevalence in both Indian and non-Indian settings, a case study involving an eDiary and its paper counterpart was utilized. Linguistic validation was performed according to the special list of precautions for translating Indian languages and adapting for e-administration as outlined in Figure 1. To preempt diffi culties associated with Indian language translation, a concept elaboration guide was created by a survey research expert and utilized by translators and project management for complex terminology within the questionnaires; back-translations were reviewed by a survey research expert versed in the cultural requirements and linguistic structure of Indian languages; the same expert assisted with the communication between the US-English speaking project management and the Indian-English speaking translators; and interviewers clearly informed subjects that there were no right or wrong answers and that their interpretation of the material was what was being assessed. To accommodate special issues related to ePRO, our project team ensured that the Excel spreadsheet used for the translation of the ePRO questionnaire could accommodate Urdu’s right-to-left text orientation, tested fonts to identify the best ones for use with the ePRO vendor’s character limit per screen, proofread screenshots to ensure proper display, implemented necessary changes resulting from cognitive debriefi ng in an Excel spreadsheet, color-coded the new text for ease of modifi cation, and proofread modifi ed screenshots before fi nalizing the translations. Even after implementation of these precautionary measures, subject debriefi ng was crucial in order to identify and correct added diffi culties that Indian subjects face when dealing with the technical terminology and complex instructions associated with e-administration. The eDiary and the Back-up Paper Diary were translated and debriefed within nine distinct culturolinguistic settings, four of which were Indian languages (two from the Indic language family and two Dravidian). The demographic and summary data displayed in Table 1 showcase comparable results between the electronic and paper questionnaires and between language groups.