PTOTSLPOtherEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2023

Development of simple descriptions of the ICF Generic-30 Set in different languages: laying the foundation for an ICF-based clinical tool for Europe.

Aydan Oral, Carlotte Kiekens, Patricia DE Vriendt and 17 others

PMID 37083101

WHAT IT FOUND

The ICF Generic-30 Set now has language-specific simple descriptions for Croatian, Flemish/Dutch, Greek, Polish and Turkish.

These versions were developed by rehabilitation experts to make the tool usable in local clinical settings.

Key findings

01Simple descriptions for the ICF Generic-30 Set were developed for Croatian, Flemish/Dutch, Greek, Polish and Turkish using a multi-stage consensus process.

02The consensus process involved groups of 19-24 rehabilitation experts, including physiotherapists, occupational therapists and speech-language pathologists.

03Differences between the language versions included variations in sentence structure, simplification techniques, and some content changes such as replacing 'interacting' with 'communicating' in the Polish version.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

This paper describes the development process and the resulting descriptions; it does not report on the clinical validation, reliability, or validity of these specific language versions in practice. Some language versions contained content changes that deviate from the original ICF core concept (e.g., Polish 'communicating' vs 'interacting'), which could affect data comparability across countries if not addressed in future validation. The consensus process was conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the modified remote process was not tested in this study. The paper does not report outcomes from using these tools with patients, only the expert consensus on the wording.

Declared interests

The development was coordinated by the UEMS-PRM Section and the ICF Research Branch. No specific financial conflicts of interest or funding sources are detailed in the provided text.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume these language versions are clinically validated or equivalent to the Italian or Chinese versions. The paper reports the development of the descriptions through expert consensus, not their testing with patients or their psychometric properties in these new languages.

Read it on PubMed →