Translation to Brazilian Portuguese and content validity of the Theoretical Domains Framework
Traducción al portugués brasileño y validación de contenido del Theoretical Domains Framework
Translation to Brazilian Portuguese and content validity of the Theoretical Domains Framework
Kiana Alexandra Rei Gray; Maria Carolina Rocha Roswell; Julia Silva del Bello; Andréia Cascaes Cruz; Mavilde da Luz Gonçalves Pedreira
Abstract
Objective: to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) for Brazilian Portuguese.
Method: this was a methodological study on translation and cross-cultural content validity, conducted from January 2021 to July 2022, in four stages: (I) initial translations; (II) translation synthesis; (III) back-translations, and (IV) assessment by an expert committee. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated for each item and for the instrument as a whole, with validity set at a CVI of 80% or higher and a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.70 or higher.
Results: after analysis by a committee of five experts, semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalences were achieved, resulting in the Brazilian pre-final version of the TDF. The theoretical framework achieved an overall CVI of 96.6% and internal consistency, as measured by Cronbach’s alpha, of 0.916.
Conclusion and implications for practice: the TDF was translated and culturally adapted to Brazilian Portuguese, with CVI and internal consistency values considered satisfactory. The use of the TDF can help identify cognitive, affective, social, and environmental influences on behavior, aiding in the knowledge translation process.
Keywords
Resumen
Palabras clave
Resumo
Objetivo: realizar a tradução e adaptação transcultural da estrutura teórica Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) para o português brasileiro.
Método: estudo metodológico de tradução e validação de conteúdo transcultural, realizado de janeiro de 2021 a julho de 2022, em quatro etapas: (I) traduções iniciais; (II) síntese das traduções; (III) retrotraduções; e (IV) avaliação por comitê de especialistas. Foi calculado o Índice de Validade de Conteúdo (IVC) para cada item e para o instrumento como um todo, sendo considerado validado um IVC igual ou superior a 80% e um coeficiente alfa de Cronbach maior ou igual a 0,70.
Resultados: após a análise do comitê composto por cinco especialistas, foram obtidas as equivalências semântica, idiomática, experimental e conceitual, resultando na versão pré-final brasileira da TDF. A estrutura teórica alcançou um IVC total de 96,6% e uma consistência interna, medida pelo alfa de Cronbach, de 0,916.
Conclusão e implicações para a prática: a TDF foi traduzida e adaptada culturalmente para o português brasileiro, com valores de IVC e consistência interna considerados satisfatórios. A utilização da TDF pode identificar influências cognitivas, afetivas, sociais e ambientais no comportamento, auxiliando no processo de translação do conhecimento.
Palavras-chave
Referencias
1 Little EA, Presseau J, Eccles MP. Understanding effects in reviews of implementation interventions using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Implement Sci. 2015 jun;10(1):90.
2 Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012 abr;7(1):37.
3 Murphy M, McCloughen A, Curtis K. Using theories of behaviour change to transition multidisciplinary trauma team training from the training environment to clinical practice. Implement Sci. 2019 abr;14(1):43.
4 Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W et al. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013 ago;46(1):81-95.
5 Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015 abr;10(53):53.
6 Abrahamson KA, Fox RL, Doebbeling BN. Facilitators and barriers to clinical practice guideline use among nurses. Am J Nurs. 2012 jul;112(7):26-35.
7 Baker R, Camosso-Stefinovic J, Gillies C, Shaw EJ, Cheater F, Flottorp S et al. Tailored interventions to overcome identified barriers to change: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 mar;(3):CD005470.
8 Evans-Lacko S, Jarrett M, McCrone P, Thornicroft G. Facilitators and barriers to implementing clinical care pathways. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 jun;10(1):182.
9 Gagliardi AR, Alhabib S. Trends in guideline implementation: a scoping systematic review. Implement Sci. 2015 abr;10(1):54.
10 Fischer F, Lange K, Klose K, Greiner W, Kraemer A. Barriers and strategies in guideline implementation: a scoping review. Healthcare. 2016 jun;4(3):36.
11 Jun J, Kovner CT, Stimpfel AW. Barriers and facilitators of nurses’ use of clinical practice guidelines: an integrative review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 ago;60:54-68.
12 Portoghese I, Galletta M, Battistelli A, Saiani L, Penna MP, Allegrini E. Change related expectations and commitment to change of nurses: the role of leadership and communication. J Nurs Manag. 2012 jul;20(5):582-91.
13 Casey M, O’Leary D, Coghlan D. Unpacking action research and implementation science: implications for nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2018 maio;74(5):1051-8.
14 Bauer MS, Kirchner J. Implementation science: what is it and why should I care? Psychiatry Res. 2020 jan;283:112376.
15 Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, O’Connor D, Patey A, Ivers N et al. A guide to using the Theoretical Domains Framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017 jun;12(1):77.
16 van der Zanden M, Helder O, Westland H, Ista E. Barriers and facilitators for the implementation of co-created nursing innovations in a Dutch university hospital. JBI Evid Implement. 2024 Jun 28. No prelo.
17 Caltabiano P, Bailie J, Laycock A, Shea B, Dykgraaf SH, Lennox N et al. Identifying barriers and facilitators to primary care practitioners implementing health assessments for people with intellectual disability: a Theoretical Domains Framework-informed scoping review. Implement Sci Commun. 2024 abr 16;5(1):39.
18 Zhou Y, Huang Y, Wang Y, Xu X, Yu Z, Gu Y. Theoretical domains framework: a bibliometric and visualization analysis from 2005-2023. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2024 ago 20;17:4055-69.
19 Dimanopoulos TA, Chaboyer W, Plummer K, Mickan S, Ullman AJ, Campbell J et al. Perceived barriers and facilitators to preventing hospital-acquired pressure injury in pediatrics: a qualitative analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2023. No prelo.
20 Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000 dez;25(24):3186-91.
21 Epstein J, Santo RM, Guillemin F. A review of guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires could not bring out a consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 abr;68(4):435-41.
22 Richardson M, Khouja CL, Sutcliffe K, Thomas J. Using the theoretical domains framework and the behavioural change wheel in an overarching synthesis of systematic reviews. BMJ Open. 2019;9(6):e024950.
23 Välimäki M, Hu S, Lantta T, Hipp K, Varpula J, Chen J et al. The impact of evidence-based nursing leadership in healthcare settings: a mixed methods systematic review. BMC Nurs. 2024 jul 3;23(1):452.
24 Watkins S. Effective decision-making: applying the theories to nursing practice. Br J Nurs. 2020 jan 23;29(2):98-101.
25 Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2007 ago;30(4):459-67.
26 Epstein J, Osborne RH, Elsworth GR, Beaton DE, Guillemin F. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Health Education Impact Questionnaire: experimental study showed expert committee, not back-translation, added value. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 abr;68(4):360-9.
27 Ursachi G, Horodnic IA, Zait A. How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Econ Finance. 2015;20:679-86.
28 Babbie E. The practice of social research. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company; 1992.
29 Goudarzian AH. Challenges and recommendations of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: a narrative review from a nursing perspective. J Nurs Rep Clin Pract. 2023;1(3):133-7.
Submitted date:
16/08/2024
Accepted date:
05/12/2025
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email