It is hoped that future studies of interpreters will identify the type and severity of translation problems, so that they can be addressed on a national and international level. Such studies could provide a basis for standards, training to meet these standards, and certification in specific languages. An initial study to assess interpreter skills would ideally have the following features. Interpreters should come from a variety of institutions from several regions, to ensure a random, or at least a representative, sample. Butcher and Garcia (2) have described a minimal level of experience in each language and culture (at least five to seven years, with day-to-day use of the language, rather than classroom exposure alone) as a prerequisite for assessing linguistic and psychometric equivalence of terms and phrases in two languages. Back-translation serves as a standard for assessing written tests—and tests exist for some interpreters. However, to my knowledge a standard assessment for psychiatric interpreters does not exist (although a few countries require training and certification). An assessment method would need to be developed. For example, a "gold standard" measure would need to assess two tasks: whether the meaning of the clinician's query or counsel is accurately conveyed to the patient (a clinician's judgment) and whether the meaning of the patient's response or query and the level of the patient's understanding are accurately conveyed to the clinician (a patient's judgment).