ArticlePublic health nutrition2015
Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Nutritional Form For the Elderly.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Nutrition literacy assessment in older adults: a scoping review of measurement tools.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Pooled it
- Factor Analysis and Psychometric Properties Adaption of Chinese Version of the Decisional Engagement Scale (DES-10).Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Psychometric properties of the Persian version of the nutritional form for the elderly (NUFFE) in nursing home residents.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe present study aimed to translate the English version of the Nutritional Form For the Elderly into Simplified Chinese, as well as to test the reliability (homogeneity and stability) and validity (content and construct validity) of the Chinese version of the Nutritional Form For the Elderly (NUFFE-CHI).
designThe study adopted a cross-sectional design. The English version of the NUFFE was translated into Simplified Chinese and a questionnaire survey was conducted. The data were analysed with statistical methods to estimate the homogeneity, stability, content and construct validity.
settingJinzhou City, China. SUBJECTS: A total number of 701 community-dwelling older adults answered the questionnaire, including background variables and the NUFFE-CHI. A small group of the participants (n 50) completed the NUFFE-CHI twice for test-retest reliability.
resultsCronbach's α was 0·65 and the split-half reliability was 0·67. Item-to-total correlation analyses showed that the scale has sufficient internal consistency. The test-retest reliability regarding the total scores of NUFFE-CHI was reflected in an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0·88. The intra-class correlation coefficients between the test and retest of the NUFFE-CHI items varied between 0·43 and 0·98. A content validity index of 0·83 explained good content validity. Construct validity was demonstrated in an exploratory factor analysis with a six-factor solution, explaining 57·65 % of the variance.
conclusionsThis first testing of the NUFFE-CHI indicates sufficient evidence for reliability, content and construct validity. Further testing studies regarding homogeneity, concurrent validity, sensitivity and specificity are required before the NUFFE-CHI can be used as a screening instrument in clinical settings and in research.
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.