Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Kannada Version of EAT 10
Dysphagia, ISSN: 1432-0460, Vol: 35, Issue: 6, Page: 962-967
2020
- 13Citations
- 45Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- Captures45
- Readers45
- 45
Article Description
Background: Eating Assessment Tool 10 is a symptom survey and has several advantages over other existing questionnaires. The instrument has also proven to be useful in establishing initial dysphagia symptom severity and to aid in measuring treatment outcomes. Due to its wide applicability, the instrument has been translated into several languages. The aim of the present study was to translate and validate the Kannada version of Eating Assessment Tool 10. Method: 88 individuals with dysphagia and equal number of healthy individuals filled the Kannada version of Eating Assessment Tool. Internal consistency and test–retest reproducibility were used for reliability testing. Validity was also established by comparing the scores of dysphagia patients and healthy controls. Results: The overall Cronbach’s α for the tool was 0.9 indicating a good internal consistency. The internal consistency of each of the items was also high, and ranged 0.88 to 0.9. Twenty patients filled the questionnaire after a span of 48 h, and the ICC coefficient was found to be 0.89 indicating a high reliability. The control group has significantly lower scores for all scales when compared to the dysphagia group [t(174) = 78.41, p < 0.001]. Conclusion: The present study demonstrates that the Kannada version of EAT 10 has good internal consistency, test retest reliability, and concurrent validity. The results of the study also reveal that it is a reliable and valid tool for screening dysphagia population.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85079185189&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-020-10094-2; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32036548; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00455-020-10094-2; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-020-10094-2; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00455-020-10094-2
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know