ArticleScientific reports2025
Adaptation and validation of the Indonesian version of the early feeding skill assessment tool for low birth weight infants.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric properties of the SMART tool for infant oral feeding skill assessment.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Initiating oral feeding at inappropriate times can cause stress and complications for Low Birth Weight (LBW) infants. It is essential to assess the infant's readiness for oral feeding to minimize stress and support the transition to full oral feeding. An objective assessment tool is necessary to improve the accuracy of determining the right time to start oral feedings. This study aimed to translate, adapt, and psychometrically validate the original English version of the Early Feeding Skill Assessment Tool (EFS) into the Indonesian language. The EFS questionnaire, an observation instrument with 19 items, uses a 3-option scoring structure: not yet evident, emerging, or consistently observed. The following EFS adaptation phases: (1) forward translation; (2) synthesis of forward translation; (3) back translation; (4) harmonization of the original and back translation; (4) pre-testing with the expert committee for content and relevance; (5) pre-testing with target user population for clarity; and (6) field testing. The translation was carried out by a certified translator in conjunction with a bilingual health professional. Seven neonatal experts participated in the pre-testing phase, while six nurses engaged with the target population for further evaluation. A total of 128 observations were conducted on infants exhibiting stable hemodynamics during the field testing phase. The two forward translations differed in 12 items, leading to expert discussions and consensus on the translation. The pre-testing among seven expert for content validity showed The EFS I-CVI and S-CVI/ave were 1 for all questions, indicating full expert agreement. The pre-testing among six nurses for face validity showed clear instructions (93%), with question agreement ranging from 60 to 100%. Six items had < 80% agreement and were rewritten as suggest from nurses. In field testing from 128 observations among 52 LBW infants revealed 19 items were valid and their reliability was 0.918. The 19-item EFS Indonesian version is valid and reliable for LBW infants. It can be used to implement as an assessment for a common language for infant feeding skills among interprofessional teams, contributing to infant feeding success.
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.