But even this idea isn’t really right as in quantum mechanics wave functions don’t turn into particles, rather particles are described by wave functions. For example even a particle you’ve just measured can be assigned a wave function and there’s a postulate of QM which tells you what it is.
It also equates measurement with the physical act of detection, but this would seem to fly in the face of the delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment for example where the observer can choose to perform whether or not a certain is performed measurement on a particle after the actual act of detection has taken place. Or interaction-free measurement where a measurement is performed on a particle despite the fact the particle is not detected.
The laws of quantum mechanics are essentially independent of what constitutes a measurement. Even if quantum measurement required that you make a blood sacrifice and utter the magick words it wouldn’t change the fundamental theory behind quantum mechanics. We can say that quantum decoherence seems to be an essential element of quantum measurement, but at the same time, for fairly basic mathematical reasons (i.e. the unitary nature of decoherence vs the non-unitary nature of collapse) we know they can’t be the same thing without a very radical and not unproblematic interpretation (i.e. doing away with collapse completely as in the many-worlds interpretation), but what actually constitutes a quantum measurement is still a very open problem.