Comparing ChatGPT-4 and Human Translation of an Outcome Questionnaire: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Non-inferiority Study

Introduction This study aimed to investigate whether ChatGPT-4 could replace traditional forward-backward translation by humans when translating a questionnaire into another language through a non-inferiority design. Methods The questionnaire Abdominal Hernia-Q was translated from English to Danish twice using two different modalities: once with traditional forward-backward translations by human translators and once with ChatGPT-4, resulting in two parallel arms. Each version was randomly assigned to 10 participants who had previously undergone ventral hernia repair. All 20 participants had to evaluate the two translations randomly, both before and after face validation. The participants and the interviewer who conducted the face validation were blinded to the translation modalities. The participants were asked to evaluate readability, comprehension, appropriate use of language, and their overall opinion of the two translated questionnaires before and after face validation on a Likert scale of 1-5 . For each outcome, the non-inferiority limit was set to 1 point on the Likert scale. Results Both translations were evaluated by 20 participants before face validation and 18 participants after. Before face validation, relevant and significant differences were found for all outcomes favoring the human-translated version, and most participants accurately guessed the translation modality and preferred the human translation. After face validation, there were no significant differences between the assessments of the two versions of the questionnaire, their guesses were less accurate, and no significant difference in their preference was observed. Conclusion ChatGPT-4 may serve as a suitable substitute for traditional forward-backward translation when translating an outcome questionnaire, provided that the ChatGPT-4 translation is subjected to human quality control and is pretested through face validation before clinical use.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.82525
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.65

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparing ChatGPT-4 and Human Translation of an Outcome Questionnaire: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Non-inferiority Study

Jacob Rosenberg, Christina Sørensen, Jason Joe Baker, Anders Gram‐Hanssen
1 citations
Cureus
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
article

Comparing ChatGPT-4 and Human Translation of an Outcome Questionnaire: A Randomized, Double-Blinded Non-inferiority Study

Jacob Rosenberg, Christina Sørensen, Jason Joe Baker, Anders Gram‐Hanssen
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Introduction This study aimed to investigate whether ChatGPT-4 could replace traditional forward-backward translation by humans when translating a questionnaire into another language through a non-inferiority design. Methods The questionnaire Abdominal Hernia-Q was translated from English to Danish twice using two different modalities: once with traditional forward-backward translations by human translators and once with ChatGPT-4, resulting in two parallel arms. Each version was randomly assigned to 10 participants who had previously undergone ventral hernia repair. All 20 participants had to evaluate the two translations randomly, both before and after face validation. The participants and the interviewer who conducted the face validation were blinded to the translation modalities. The participants were asked to evaluate readability, comprehension, appropriate use of language, and their overall opinion of the two translated questionnaires before and after face validation on a Likert scale of 1-5 . For each outcome, the non-inferiority limit was set to 1 point on the Likert scale. Results Both translations were evaluated by 20 participants before face validation and 18 participants after. Before face validation, relevant and significant differences were found for all outcomes favoring the human-translated version, and most participants accurately guessed the translation modality and preferred the human translation. After face validation, there were no significant differences between the assessments of the two versions of the questionnaire, their guesses were less accurate, and no significant difference in their preference was observed. Conclusion ChatGPT-4 may serve as a suitable substitute for traditional forward-backward translation when translating an outcome questionnaire, provided that the ChatGPT-4 translation is subjected to human quality control and is pretested through face validation before clinical use.

CureusVol. 17(4)
Herlev Hospital (DK)
Herlev Hospital
Openalex Percentile: Top 26%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
0.65
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.