Methodological challenges in cross-language qualitative research: a research review.
OBJECTIVE
Cross-language qualitative research occurs when a language barrier is present between researchers and participants. The language barrier is frequently mediated through the use of a translator or interpreter. The purpose of this analysis of cross-language qualitative research was threefold: (1) review the methods literature addressing cross-language research; (2) synthesize the methodological recommendations from the literature into a list of criteria that could evaluate how researchers methodologically managed translators and interpreters in their qualitative studies; (3) test these criteria on published cross-language qualitative studies.


METHODS
A group of 40 purposively selected cross-language qualitative studies found in nursing and health sciences journals.


METHODS
The synthesis of the cross-language methods literature produced 14 criteria to evaluate how qualitative researchers managed the language barrier between themselves and their study participants. To test the criteria, the researcher conducted a summative content analysis framed by discourse analysis techniques of the 40 cross-language studies.


RESULTS
The evaluation showed that only 6 out of 40 studies met all the criteria recommended by the cross-language methods literature for the production of trustworthy results in cross-language qualitative studies. Multiple inconsistencies, reflecting disadvantageous methodological choices by cross-language researchers, appeared in the remaining 33 studies. To name a few, these included rendering the translator or interpreter as an invisible part of the research process, failure to pilot test interview questions in the participant's language, no description of translator or interpreter credentials, failure to acknowledge translation as a limitation of the study, and inappropriate methodological frameworks for cross-language research.


CONCLUSIONS
The finding about researchers making the role of the translator or interpreter invisible during the research process supports studies completed by other authors examining this issue. The analysis demonstrated that the criteria produced by this study may provide useful guidelines for evaluating cross-language research and for novice cross-language researchers designing their first studies. Finally, the study also indicates that researchers attempting cross-language studies need to address the methodological issues surrounding language barriers between researchers and participants more systematically.
Squires
Allison
A
Center for Health Outcomes & Policy Research, University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. asq@nursing.upenn.edu
D003144:Communication Barriers; D006801:Humans; D007802:Language; D036301:Qualitative Research
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
16204405
J Adv Nurs. 2001 Mar;33(5):566-74
11298192
J Adv Nurs. 2006 Feb;53(4):435-43
16448486
Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 Feb;43(2):173-84
15923006
Nurs Sci Q. 2005 Oct;18(4):286-92
16210740
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2005;37(4):348-53
16396408
Int J Nurs Stud. 2003 Nov;40(8):797-805
14568362
Nurse Res. 2007;14(3):46-59
17494468
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007 May;34(3):713-20
17573330
Int Nurs Rev. 2004 Jun;51(2):94-103
15102114
J Adv Nurs. 2001 Oct;36(2):237-45
11580798
Qual Health Res. 2001 Jul;11(4):568-79
11521612
Qual Health Res. 2007 Apr;17(4):468-76
17416700
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2004;36(1):11-5
15098413
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2001;33(3):265-71
11552554
J Adv Nurs. 1997 Aug;26(2):418-23
9292378
West J Nurs Res. 2001 Aug;23(5):517-35
11482055
Cancer Nurs. 2004 Jan-Feb;27(1):17-24
15108948
J Adv Nurs. 2004 Dec;48(6):642-50
15548255
J Holist Nurs. 2007 Jun;25(2):81-91; discussion 92; quiz 93-5
17515562
Qual Health Res. 2007 Dec;17(10):1372-80
18000076
J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2002 Feb;14(2):93-6
11892542
J Adv Nurs. 2003 Jan;41(1):80-7
12519291
MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2007 Jan-Feb;32(1):18-24
17308453
Qual Health Res. 2002 Jul;12(6):844-54
12109728
J Fam Nurs. 2005 Aug;11(3):242-63
16287827
West J Nurs Res. 2001 Aug;23(5):536-54
11482056
Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 Jul;43(5):535-45
16143333
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2005;37(1):10-7
15813581
Accid Emerg Nurs. 2006 Apr;14(2):97-103
16554157
Int Nurs Rev. 2006 Mar;53(1):59-65
16430762
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2002 Jul-Aug;47(4):239-46
12138931
Cancer Nurs. 2001 Oct;24(5):387-94
11605709
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2007 Jul-Aug;52(4):351-60
17603957
Int J Nurs Stud. 2004 Mar;41(3):239-46
14967180
J Community Health Nurs. 2006 Spring;23(1):49-64
16445364
Cancer Nurs. 2003 Aug;26(4):267-75
12886117
J Adv Nurs. 2005 Sep;51(6):549-57
16129005
J Holist Nurs. 2003 Jun;21(2):100-16
12794955
Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2006 Jul-Aug;14(4):553-60
16967162
J Adv Nurs. 2006 Sep;55(6):723-35
16925621
J Adv Nurs. 2000 Oct;32(4):857-63
11095223
Int Nurs Rev. 2008 Sep;55(3):265-73
19522941
Clin Nurs Res. 2003 Nov;12(4):304-23
14620689
Qual Health Res. 2002 Jul;12(6):816-25
12109726
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2002;34(4):323-9
12501735
Midwifery. 2005 Sep;21(3):212-23
15967548
J Nurs Scholarsh. 2006;38(3):262-8
17044344
Clin Nurs Res. 2005 Feb;14(1):32-56
15604227
J Community Health Nurs. 2007 Spring;24(1):31-47
17266404
J Adv Nurs. 2004 Mar;45(6):595-602
15012637
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2006 Sep;15(4):397-403
16968323
Soc Sci Med. 1992 Aug;35(4):603-12
1519114
Res Nurs Health. 2002 Dec;25(6):438-51
12424781
Nurs Inq. 2002 Mar;9(1):52-6
12164715
ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 2003 Jul-Sep;26(3):185-95
12945654