ArticleDiseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus2022
Validation of the Swedish Watson Dysphagia Scale for adult patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.
Article in Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eosinophilic gastrointestinal diseases.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026Review
- Peripheral T-cell transitions following proton pump inhibitor therapy in eosinophilic esophagitis.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2026Article
- Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Swallowed Topical Corticosteroids in Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- A fatty acid metabolism-related genes model for predicting the prognosis and immunotherapy effect of lung adenocarcinoma.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2024Article
- Investigating immune profile by CyTOF in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis after treatment with orodispersible budesonide.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2024Article
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
backgroundThe Swedish Watson Dysphagia Scale (S-WDS) has been used to assess dysphagia in patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) but has not been validated for this patient group. The aim of this study was to validate the S-WDS for adult patients with EoE.
methodsNinety-seven Swedish adult patients with EoE and 97 controls without dysphagia filled out the S-WDS, the Swedish Eosinophilic Esophagitis Activity Index (S-EEsAI) and a set of supplementary questions. The reliability of the S-WDS was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, Pearson correlation of items and total score, and test-retest analysis (n = 29). Validity was investigated using Spearman correlations of the S-WDS items, S-EEsAI domains and a self-assessment score, and by investigating floor and ceiling effects.
resultsThe Cronbach's alpha of the S-WDS was 0.77 and all items demonstrated moderate to strong correlation to the S-WDS score (r = 0.40-0.81) indicative of sufficient reliability of the instrument. In addition, the test-retest results reflected excellent reliability with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.85 for the S-WDS score. Adequate validity of the instrument was demonstrated, the S-WDS score correlated moderately with the self-assessment score and with 4/6 S-EEsAI domains, and strongly with the remaining two domains. Floor effects were more common for liquids and soft-textured foods and ceiling effects increased with increasing food consistency. The S-WDS scores of the patient group were significantly different from those of the nondysphagia control group (P < 0.001).
conclusionThe S-WDS instrument is an appropriate and valid instrument for assessment of dysphagia in patients with EoE.
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.