The accuracy of google translate for abstracting data from non-English-language trials for systematic reviews

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 171, Issue 9, 2019, Pages 677-679

  Jackson, Jeffrey L ^a   Kuriyama, Akira ^b   Anton, Andreea ^a   Choi, April ^c   Fournier, Jean Pascal ^d   Geier, Anne Kathrin ^e   Jacquerioz, Frederique ^f   Kogan, Dmitry ^a   Scholcoff, Cecilia ^a   Sun, Rao ^g  

^a MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^b KURASHIKI CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^c RUTGERS NEW JERSEY MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE NANTES   (France)

^e UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG   (Germany)

^f GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^g HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GOOGLE TRANSLATE; LANGUAGE; LETTER; MOBILE APPLICATION; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; TRANSLATING (LANGUAGE); HUMAN; LITERATURE; REPRODUCIBILITY;

HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TRANSLATING;

EID: 85075583234     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: 15393704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/M19-0891     Document Type: Letter

References (5)

1. Jackson JL, Kuriyama A. How often do systematic reviews exclude articles not published in English? [Letter]. J Gen Intern Med. 2019. [PMID: 31011958] doi:10.1007/s11606-019-04976-x
2. Balk EM, Chung M, Chen ML, et al. Accuracy of data extraction of non-English language trials with Google Translate. Methods Research Report. (Prepared by the Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center under contract 290-2007-10055 I). Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012. AHRQ publication 12-EHC056-EF.
3. Turner K. Google Translate is getting really, really accurate. Washington Post. 3 October 2016. Accessed at www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/10/03/google-translate-is-getting-really-really-accurate /?utm_term=.4eb5991f4cfc on 9 July 2019.
4. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17: 1-12. [PMID: 8721797]
5. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, et al; Cochrane Bias Methods Group. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928. [PMID: 22008217] doi:10.1136/bmj.d5928