ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Development of a three-item short form of the EAT-10 for screening suspected dysphagia in hospitalized older adults: findings from a multicentre study.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: To develop a three-item short form of the EAT-10 by identifying the smallest subset of items that preserves the screening performance of the full questionnaire in hospitalized older adults. Design: Multicentre cross-sectional observational study. Methods: The study was conducted in nine public hospitals in Spain within the NUTRIFAG project. Hospitalized patients aged ≥65 years with a length of stay ≥48 h were included. Patients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition at admission, those in terminal condition, or with a primary diagnosis of cancer were excluded. Suspected dysphagia was assessed using the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10), with a score ≥3 considered positive. Multivariate logistic regression models with forward item selection were used to identify the most informative symptoms indicators. The sample was randomly divided into a training subset (60%) and an internal assessment subset (40%). Model performance was evaluated using Nagelkerke's pseudo Results: The sample included 2,519 participants. Three symptom indicators emerged as the most informative for identifying patients with suspected dysphagia: requiring extra effort to swallow liquids, requiring extra effort to swallow solids, and coughing while eating. Together, these indicators showed high agreement with the classification obtained using the full EAT-10 in the training phase ( Conclusion: The proposed three-item subset represents a shortened version of the EAT-10 that preserved much of the screening performance of the full questionnaire in hospitalized older adults. Although it may facilitate dysphagia screening by reproducing the classification obtained with the full EAT-10 in routine nursing assessment, independent external validation against clinical reference standards is required before its diagnostic use can be recommended.
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.