ArticleThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2019
Inter-Rater Reliability of the Mealtime Scan+.
Article in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Dyadic interactions and physical and social environment in dementia mealtime care: a systematic review of instruments.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2021Pooled it
- Development and Psychometric Testing of the Mealtime Engagement Scale in Direct Care Providers of Nursing Home Residents With Dementia.The Gerontologist · 2021Article
- Reliability Testing of the Team Member Mealtime Experience Questionnaire.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe Mealtime Scan (MTS) was developed to assess the dining environment in Long Term Care (LTC). MTS has been reviewed and updated to ensure its standardization and responsiveness to changes in the dining environment. The objectives of this paper are to provide an overview of the changes made in the new MTS+ tool and to describe its inter-rater reliability. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsThe observational and scoring methods used to evaluate the physical, social, and relational-centered dining environments in LTC homes were reviewed and updated into MTS+ and an overall quality of dining rating derived. Two trained assessors were evaluated for the inter-rater reliability. Nine dining rooms in three LTC homes at different meals were observed for a total of 45 observations. Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) was used to assess reliability.
resultsMTS+ demonstrated good reliability on the orientation cues, social environment, and relationship-centered activities (orientation cues ICC: 0.75, social ICC: 0.78, relational ICC: 0.78). However, the tool's reliability was poor for the physical environment, ICC: 0.48 and moderate for the overall rating of the quality of the dining environment, ICC: 0.67. Discussion and Implications: Although deemed more effective and practical for use in intervention studies, MTS+ has some limitations with respect to its reliability, particularly in assessing the physical environment. It is hypothesized that more extensive training of the assessors may lead to improvements in the reliability of MTS+. MTS+ can be used in intervention research when one assessor completes repeat observations of a dining area.
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.