ArticlePalliative & supportive care2026
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the
Article in Palliative & supportive care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe growing demand for palliative care (PC) services and the need for standardized approaches to patient identification highlight the importance of having validated tools available in Brazilian Portuguese. The absence of culturally adapted instruments may hinder appropriate patient assessment, delay referral to PC services, and ultimately compromise the quality of care delivered. This study aims to translate and adapt the
methodsHerdman's recommendations were followed, which include conceptual, item, and semantic validation stages. After authorization from the ID-PALL© developers, the translation, synthesis of the translated versions, and back-translation of the instrument were performed. Subsequently, a committee of 11 experts evaluated the semantic, idiomatic, conceptual, and cultural equivalence between the versions, resulting in the development of the pre-final version. To validate the instrument's content, this version was pre-tested (
resultsThe cross-cultural adaptation demonstrated the suitability of the translated versions after semantic and cultural adjustments. The pre-final version showed satisfactory comprehension and semantic (CVC), idiomatic (CVC), conceptual (CVC), and cultural (CVC) equivalence, which enabled the development of the final version, named IDPALL-BR. The data obtained in the pre-test demonstrated content validity among the target audience, with a CVC = 0.909. SIGNIFICANCE OF
resultsThe Brazilian Portuguese version of this instrument has semantic validity and, therefore, shows potential for screening general and specialized PC needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.