ArticleCoDAS2025
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of the Boston Residue and Clearance Scale (BR-BRACS).
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt The Boston Residue and Clearance Scale (BR-BRACS) into Brazilian Portuguese and validate the image selection content for the scale.
methodsThe project was approved by the Institution's Ethics Committee under number 67715717.6.0000.5406. The process involved translating the scale into the target language, synthesizing the translations, and back-translating it into the original language. A literature review was conducted to define the concept of pharyngeal residue and ensure the content validity of the images representing the scale. Then, 50 fiberoptic endoscopic evaluations of swallowing were analyzed and submitted to three judges for visual-perceptual evaluation. Agreement among the judges was analyzed using Fleiss' Kappa test with a 95% confidence interval.
resultsDiscrepancies in lexical and syntactic contexts were identified during translation and resolved through a consensus among translators and authors. The back-translated versions were equivalent to the original. The images proposed for the scale showed near-perfect agreement among the judges.
conclusionThe translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and selection of images for visual-perceptual evaluation of pharyngeal residue in the BR-BRACS were completed with evidence of content validity.
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.