ArticleCoDAS2026
DEGLUTO: initial validity evidence of a clinical swallowing assessment tool for adults.
Article in CoDAS, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo develop and verify content validity evidence of DEGLUTO, a clinical swallowing assessment instrument for adults.
methodsA cross-sectional methodological study. The first phase validated the content using the Delphi method with 13 judges, analyzing 28 items and using CVI, CVC, and Kappa for agreement. The second phase evaluated response processes by applying the instrument to 210 adult and elderly patients by ten speech therapists, analyzing application time, acceptability, and inter-rater agreement.
resultsIn content validation, seven items were removed and twenty-one reformulated, resulting in 21 items with a mean CVI > 0.90 and substantial to almost perfect agreement. In response processes, a mean application time of 15 minutes, good acceptability, and high agreement on most items were observed. One item was excluded, consolidating the final version with 20 items.
conclusionDEGLUTO presented robust initial validity evidence, demonstrating clinical applicability, clarity, and theoretical adequacy, qualifying it as a promising tool for the assessment of oropharyngeal dysphagia in clinical practice.
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.