Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36589609›Full record

ArticleArchives of rheumatology2022

Turkish translation and validation of the Xerostomia Inventory.

Sezin Yüce Sarı, Melek Tuğce Yılmaz, Ayşenur Elmalı, Levent Kılıç, Deniz Yüce, Gökhan Özyiğit, Mustafa Cengiz, Gözde Yazıcı

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of rheumatology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sezin Yüce SarıDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-2395-6868
Melek Tuğce YılmazDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-9813-9286
Ayşenur ElmalıDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-3855-3391
Levent KılıçDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-1064-9690
Deniz YüceDepartment of Preventive Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-3070-1329
Gökhan ÖzyiğitDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-7497-4348
Mustafa CengizDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-3692-8532
Gözde YazıcıDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-7430-6729
Hacettepe University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The Xerostomia Inventory (XI) was developed to assess the severity of dryness in patients with xerostomia. It has a long and a short form with three- and five-point Guttman-type response options. In this study, we aimed to translate the XI into Turkish, to assess the validity and reliability of both response options in patients with head & neck cancer (HNC) or Sjögren syndrome (SS), and to select the optimal version for Turkish patients. Patients and methods: Between January 2019 and June 2019, the XI was translated into Turkish (XI-T) and applied to patients aged ≥18 years with HNC and SS. All patients were applied two tests including both the three- and five-point options. The internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach alpha and test-retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Content validity was based on expert opinion and patient reviews. Results: A total of 186 patients (109 males, 77 females; median age: 54 years; range, 19 to 78 years) answered the XI-T. The number of patients with HNC and SS was 143 (77%) and 43 (23%), respectively. Median XI-T score was 17 for the three-point, and 24 for the five-point option, respectively. Overall internal consistency was satisfactory for both options (α=0.81 and α=0.89, respectively). Overall test-retest reliability was satisfactory and ICCs ranged between 0.71 and 0.92 for the three-point, and 0.36 and 0.94 for the five-point option, respectively. Assessments based on expert opinions and patient reviews also favored the content validity of the scale. Conclusion: The XI-T with both three- and five-point options is a valid and reliable tool to evaluate the presence and severity of dryness in patients with HNC and SS who experience xerostomia. The three-point option is more comprehensible and can be preferred over the five-point option in the Turkish population.

Indexed as

Head and neck cancerSjögren syndromevalidityxerostomia.

Identifiers

PMID36589609
PMCPMC9791545
OpenAlexW4220814501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.