Background: A study with aim to evaluate the impact of language and culture on the validity of pain quality measures by comparing the words spoken by individuals with chronic pain indicated that direct translations of measures that are developed using samples of patients from one country or culture are not necessarily content valid for use in other countries or cultures; some adaptations may be required in order for such measures to be most useful in new language and culture.
Objective: To re-evaluate the article Journal of Pain Research 2016:9 1057–1066, and reflect on the implications of its recommendations.
Methods: Content analysis of article published in Journal of Pain Research 2016:9 1057–1066., Critical review of the specified article was performed, its components, overall integrity assessed, relevant information was obtained from profiles, references, citations, and web. Current developments and changes in state of science and art are collected. Finally the general, philosophical, theoretical, methodological, and analytic output are presented.
Result: There was no complete theory, concepts, definition of terms. Topics were not covered, authors were uncertain on their sample size, sampling and its reliability. Content validity itself not defined determined, tested and presented. Interdependence of individuals, their previous and current works prevailed. Result was inconclusive. Finally concurrent changes in definition, change in tools, were not accounted for. The membership degree of authors is deep rooted.
Conclusion: The article provided unwarranted conclusion and recommendation.
Recommendation: Refinement, self- rectification and transformation.