ArticleCoDAS2025
FonoTCS: validation of a tool for assessing clinical reasoning in Speech-Language pathology.
Article in CoDAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo validate the internal structure of the Speech-Language Pathology Script Concordance Test (FonoTCS), which will be developed in a virtual, open-access format, to be used in the assessment of clinical reasoning among young professionals and students of speech-language pathology with a generalist background, speakers of Brazilian Portuguese.
methodsThis is a study to validate the internal structure of the instrument. Twenty-five specialist speech-language pathologists, with more than 10 years of generalist clinical experience, and 35 students summoned for Enade participated. Both groups evaluated the 30 clinical cases with 120 items from FonoTCS. For the final selection of specialists who made up the sample, judges whose evaluations showed Z2 results >2 and Z<-2 distant from the modal response were removed. For the selection of items present in the final format of the test, those that remained had a Pearson correlation between the transformed scores of students for a given item and the sum of the transformed scores for all items, with a value greater than 0.05. The Cronbach's Alpha test was applied to measure the internal consistency of FonoTCS, and the score of each item was defined based on the aggregated score method.
resultsThe responses of 13 specialists were considered for the definition of the final test score. The final instrument had 88 items distributed across 28 clinical cases. The internal consistency was 0.903 with a 95% confidence interval expressed by 0.86|---|0.95. These values indicate a high internal consistency among the items of FonoTCS.
conclusionFonoTCS is valid and reliable for use in evaluating the clinical reasoning of young professionals and speech-language pathology students with generalist training, who are Brazilian Portuguese speakers.
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.