ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2025
Cultural adaptation and psychometric characteristics of the child oral and motor proficiency scale (ChOMPS)-Turkish version.
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: The child oral and motor proficiency scale (ChOMPS) is a parent-reported assessment that evaluates a child's eating and drinking skills within the framework of all related motor functions. It has been found to be useful in research studies and recommended in reviews. The purpose of this study was to perform the translation and cultural adaptation of the English version of the ChOMPS to Turkish and conduct psychometric testing of the ChOMPS-Turkish version, including reliability and validity. Materials and methods: This study was conducted with 185 children. Cronbach's α, corrected item-to-total correlations, coefficient of variation, and Cronbach's α when one item was deleted were used to assess internal consistency. In addition, test-retest reliability was assessed. The functional oral intake scale (FOIS) and pediatric eating assessment tool-10 (Pedi-EAT-10) scales were used for convergent validity. Moreover, Pedi-EAT-10 score was used to perform the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the sensitivity and specificity of ChOMPS-Turkish version were calculated. Results: It was found that the ChOMPS-Turkish version demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability. Cronbach's α levels were excellent (0.969 and 0.973), and test-retest reliability demonstrated very high agreement (0.997-0.999; p < 0.001). Significant good-to-excellent correlations were found between the validation scales. In addition, the total ChOMPS-Turkish version score for dysphagia risk as estimated using Pedi-EAT-10 had 94.74% sensitivity and 80.28% specificity. Conclusion: The ChOMPS-Turkish version demonstrates strong evidence of validity and reliability for use in clinical practice and research.
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.