PURPOSE: In the absence of an official, authorized Korean version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and amid the coexistence and mixed use of unofficial translations, this scoping review aimed to systematically map the types, characteristics, and use...
PURPOSE: In the absence of an official, authorized Korean version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and amid the coexistence and mixed use of unofficial translations, this scoping review aimed to systematically map the types, characteristics, and uses of Korean-language NDI translations in Korea to identify key issues.
METHODS: Following Arksey-O’Malley, Levac et al., and PRISMA-ScR guidance, a single reviewer searched Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, KCI, KoreaMed; 2015-2025), screened records, and charted data (with data extraction verification). A descriptive synthesis was conducted.
RESULTS: Of 94,404 records, 515 studies were included after screening. We identified four unofficial Korean translations used in 159/515 (30.9%) studies. The remaining 356/515 (69.1%) used questionnaires of unknown origin or modified versions of such questionnaires. Rules for handling missing responses were reported in only 13/515 (2.5%). Unauthorized inclusion of full questionnaires as appendices occurred in 158/515 (30.7%), and arbitrary changes to scoring or scale structure were made in 20/515 (3.9%).
CONCLUSION: In the absence of an official Korean NDI, unofficial, unknown-source, and modified versions are widely used, resulting in copyright and ethical risks and weakened score comparability and validity. The poor reporting of missing data handling and scoring rules exacerbated these issues. The Mapi Research Trust, the copy right and licensing body responsible for the NDI, oversees the official Korean version and should adopt a single standard and institutionalize core reporting requirements, including mandatory license verification and restrictions on posting full questionnaires as appendices.