Semantic Evaluation of Nursing Assessment Scales Translations by ChatGPT 4.0: A Lexicometric Analysis

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: The use of standardized assessment tools within the nursing care process is a globally established practice, widely recognized as a foundation for evidence-based evaluation. Accurate translation is essential to ensure their correct and consistent clinical use. While effective, traditional procedures are time-consuming and resource-intensive, leading to increasing interest in whether artificial intelligence can assist or streamline this process for nursing researchers. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the translation's quality of nursing assessment scales performed by ChatGPT 4.0. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 31 nursing rating scales with 772 items were translated from English to Italian using two different prompts, and then underwent a deep lexicometric analysis. To assess the semantic accuracy of the translations the Sentence-BERT, Jaccard similarity, TF-IDF cosine similarity, and Overlap ratio were used. Sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and AUROC were calculated to assess the quality of the translation classification. Paired-sample <i>t</i>-tests were conducted to compare the similarity scores. <b>Results</b>: The Maastricht prompt produced translations that are marginally but consistently more semantically and lexically faithful to the original. While all differences were found to be statistically significant, the corresponding effect sizes indicate that the advantage of the Maastricht prompt is slight but consistent across all measures. The sensitivity of the prompts was 0.929 (92.9%) for York and 0.932 (93.2%) for Maastricht. Specificity and precision remained for both at 1.000. <b>Conclusions</b>: Findings highlight the potential of prompt engineering as a low-cost, effective method to enhance translation outcomes. Nonetheless, as translation represents only a preliminary step in the full validation process, further studies should investigate the integration of AI-assisted translation within the broader framework of instrument adaptation and validation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nursing Reports
Published
2025-06-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep15060211
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.27
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Semantic Evaluation of Nursing Assessment Scales Translations by ChatGPT 4.0: A Lexicometric Analysis

Daniele Napolitano, Alessio Lo Cascio, Antonio Bonacaro, Mauro Parozzi et al.
5 citations
Nursing Reports
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
3.27
article

Semantic Evaluation of Nursing Assessment Scales Translations by ChatGPT 4.0: A Lexicometric Analysis

Daniele Napolitano, Alessio Lo Cascio, Antonio Bonacaro, Mauro Parozzi, Stefano Mancin, Ilaria Marcomini, Roberta Pendoni, Mattia Bozzetti, Giovanni Cangelosi, Elena Sblendorio
article en
5 citations

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives</b>: The use of standardized assessment tools within the nursing care process is a globally established practice, widely recognized as a foundation for evidence-based evaluation. Accurate translation is essential to ensure their correct and consistent clinical use. While effective, traditional procedures are time-consuming and resource-intensive, leading to increasing interest in whether artificial intelligence can assist or streamline this process for nursing researchers. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the translation's quality of nursing assessment scales performed by ChatGPT 4.0. <b>Methods</b>: A total of 31 nursing rating scales with 772 items were translated from English to Italian using two different prompts, and then underwent a deep lexicometric analysis. To assess the semantic accuracy of the translations the Sentence-BERT, Jaccard similarity, TF-IDF cosine similarity, and Overlap ratio were used. Sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and AUROC were calculated to assess the quality of the translation classification. Paired-sample <i>t</i>-tests were conducted to compare the similarity scores. <b>Results</b>: The Maastricht prompt produced translations that are marginally but consistently more semantically and lexically faithful to the original. While all differences were found to be statistically significant, the corresponding effect sizes indicate that the advantage of the Maastricht prompt is slight but consistent across all measures. The sensitivity of the prompts was 0.929 (92.9%) for York and 0.932 (93.2%) for Maastricht. Specificity and precision remained for both at 1.000. <b>Conclusions</b>: Findings highlight the potential of prompt engineering as a low-cost, effective method to enhance translation outcomes. Nonetheless, as translation represents only a preliminary step in the full validation process, further studies should investigate the integration of AI-assisted translation within the broader framework of instrument adaptation and validation.

Nursing ReportsVol. 15(6)
Università di Camerino (IT), University of Parma (IT), Vita-Salute San Raffaele University (IT), Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic (IT), Azienda Universitaria Ospedaliera Consorziale - Policlinico Bari (IT), IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (IT), La Maddalena (IT), Istituti Ospitalieri di Cremona (IT), Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale di Cremona
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
3.27
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.