ArticleBioMed research international2014
Psychometric properties of questionnaires on functional health status in oropharyngeal dysphagia: a systematic literature review.
Article in BioMed research international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
54 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Content validity of measures in early numeracy in children up to eight years: A COSMIN systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review on Evaluating Responsiveness of Parent- or Caregiver-Reported Child Maltreatment Measures for Interventions.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2023Pooled it
- The Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI)-Normative Values. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Dysphagia · 2021Pooled it
- A Systematic Review Evaluating Psychometric Properties of Parent or Caregiver Report Instruments on Child Maltreatment: Part 2: Internal Consistency, Reliability, Measurement Error, Structural Validity, Hypothesis Testing, Cross-Cultural Validity, and Criterion Validity.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2021Pooled it
- Measurement properties of self-report questionnaires on health-related quality of life and functional health status in dysphonia: a systematic review using the COSMIN taxonomy.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2019Pooled it
- Psychometric Characteristics of Non-instrumental Swallowing and Feeding Assessments in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review Using COSMIN.Dysphagia · 2018Pooled it
- A systematic review evaluating the psychometric properties of measures of social inclusion.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- The quality of systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Survey of suspected dysphagia prevalence in home-dwelling older people using the 10-Item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10).PloS one · 2019Trial
- Machine learning-based screening tool for predicting the risk of oropharyngeal dysphagia in patients with ischemic stroke.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Development of a three-item short form of the EAT-10 for screening suspected dysphagia in hospitalized older adults: findings from a multicentre study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Protocol for a systematic review evaluating psychometric properties and gender-related measurement (non)invariance of self-report assessment tools for autism in adults.Systematic reviews · 2024Article
- Relating Physiologic Swallowing Impairment, Functional Swallowing Ability, and Swallow-Specific Quality of Life.Dysphagia · 2023Article
- Reliability and Validity of Non-Instrumental Clinical Assessments for Adults with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Discriminant Ability of the Eating Assessment Tool-10 to Detect Swallowing Safety and Efficiency Impairments.The Laryngoscope · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionQuestionnaires on Functional Health Status (FHS) are part of the assessment of oropharyngeal dysphagia.
objectiveTo conduct a systematic review of the literature on the psychometric properties of English-language FHS questionnaires in adults with oropharyngeal dysphagia.
methodsA systematic search was performed using the electronic databases Pubmed and Embase. The psychometric properties of the questionnaires were determined based on the COSMIN taxonomy of measurement properties and definitions for health-related patient-reported outcomes and the COSMIN checklist using preset psychometric criteria.
resultsThree questionnaires were included: the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10), the Swallowing Outcome after Laryngectomy (SOAL), and the Self-report Symptom Inventory. The Sydney Swallow Questionnaire (SSQ) proved to be identical to the Modified Self-report Symptom Inventory. All FHS questionnaires obtained poor overall methodological quality scores for most measurement properties.
conclusionsThe retrieved FHS questionnaires need psychometric reevaluation; if the overall methodological quality shows satisfactory improvement on most measurement properties, the use of the questionnaires in daily clinic and research can be justified. However, in case of insufficient validity and/or reliability scores, new FHS questionnaires need to be developed using and reporting on preestablished psychometric criteria as recommended in literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.