This page was translated automatically from Turkish. Read the original

Bu sayfa, 26. Dünya Psikiyatri Kongresi'nde sunulan çalışmanın yapay zekâ desteğiyle hazırlanmış Türkçe özetidir. Çalışmanın sahibi sunan yazarlardır; atıf için orijinal kaynağa başvurun.

Translating ICD-11 from a non-Indo-European language perspective: Conceptual challenges in the Finnish project on mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders

A non-indo-european perspective on translating icd-11: conceptual challenges in the finnish mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders project

The main challenge in translating ICD-11 into Finnish is conceptual rather than linguistic, and successful implementation depends as much on professional engagement and conceptual clarity as on the translation itself.

Finland is a Nordic country with a population of 5.6 million whose national language belongs to the Uralic language family. ICD-10 has been used there since 1996 and plays a major role in shaping clinical practice; the transition to ICD-11 therefore represents not merely a technical update but a substantial change in diagnostic language and practice. The translation process was coordinated by the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), with specialty-specific sections delegated to the relevant medical societies and the Finnish Psychiatric Association taking responsibility for the chapter on mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders. During the process, translating the Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Requirements (CDDR) was found to be essential for successful implementation. More than 80 professionals participated in multidisciplinary expert groups, while a national core team prepared and harmonised the final translations. Artificial intelligence was reported to be useful for processing the material but insufficient for resolving conceptual, clinical and linguistic questions. Many concepts in ICD-11 rely on nuanced English terms whose intended meanings are not always explicitly documented, creating difficulties when translating into a structurally different language. Close collaboration with national authorities and direct communication with WHO experts proved invaluable. Decisions also had to be made about whether changes in ICD-11 terminology should be reflected in Finnish usage when ICD-10 terms were deeply embedded in clinical practice. The Finnish experience shows that the greatest challenges are often conceptual rather than linguistic, and that successful implementation depends at least as much on professional engagement and conceptual clarity as on translation.

Tüm WCP 2026 özetleri