ArticleAmerican journal of speech-language pathology2023
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Bulbar Dysfunction Index-Remote: Test-Retest and Interrater Reliability of Candidate Items.
Article in American journal of speech-language pathology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differentiating upper- and lower motor neuron diseases using automated acoustic analysis.Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis & frontotemporal degeneration · 2025Article
- Construct Validity of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Bulbar Dysfunction Index-Remote.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe primary aim of this study was to establish the reliability of candidate items as a step in the development of the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Bulbar Dysfunction Index-Remote (ALS-BDI-Remote), a novel tool being developed for the detection and monitoring of bulbar signs and symptoms in remote settings.
methodThe set of candidate items included 40 items covering three domains: cranial nerve examination, auditory-perceptual evaluation, and functional assessment. Forty-eight participants diagnosed with ALS and exhibiting a range of bulbar disease severity were included. Data collection for each participant took place on Zoom over three sessions. During Session 1, the participants were instructed to adjust their Zoom settings and to optimize their recording environment (e.g., lighting, background noise). Their cognition and eating were screened to determine their ability to follow instructions and their eligibility to perform the swallowing and chewing tasks. During Session 2, two speech-language pathologists (SLPs) administered the tool consecutively to determine the items' interrater reliability. During Session 3, one of the SLPs readministered the tool within 2 weeks of Session 1 to assess test-retest reliability. The reliability of each item was estimated using weighted kappa and the percentage of agreement. To be considered reliable, the items had to reach a threshold of 0.5 weighted kappa or 80% percentage agreement (if skewed distribution of the scores) for both interrater and test-retest reliability.
resultsIn total, 33 of the 40 candidate items reached the reliability cutoff for both reliability analyses. All assessment domains included reliable items. Items requiring very good visualization of structures or movements were generally less reliable.
conclusionsThis study resulted in the selection of reliable items to be included in the next version of the ALS-BDI-Remote, which will undergo psychometric evaluation (reliability, validity, and responsiveness analyses). Additionally, the results contributed to our understanding of the remote administration of SLP assessments for telehealth applications.
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.