Sz-Ting Wang , Kun-Tai Kang , Wen-Chin Weng , Pin-Hung Lu , Chi-Fen Chang , Yuh-Yu Lin , Yu-Chen Lee , Chen-Yu Chen , Jing-Chun Song , Wei-Chung Hsu
{"title":"儿科饮食评估工具-10》繁体中文版的翻译和验证。","authors":"Sz-Ting Wang , Kun-Tai Kang , Wen-Chin Weng , Pin-Hung Lu , Chi-Fen Chang , Yuh-Yu Lin , Yu-Chen Lee , Chen-Yu Chen , Jing-Chun Song , Wei-Chung Hsu","doi":"10.1016/j.jfma.2024.04.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background/Purpose</h3><div>The Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool-10 (Pedi-EAT-10) is a caregiver-administrated subjective questionnaire for evaluating swallowing and feeding disorders among children. This study translated the Pedi-EAT-10 into Traditional Chinese and tested the translated version's reliability and validity.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Pedi-EAT-10 was translated into Traditional Chinese by experts and finalized after discussion and testing. A total of 168 participants, consisting of 32 children with dysphagia from a tertiary medical center and 136 healthy controls from its Children Care Center for Employees, were recruited. All participants were assessed by an otolaryngologist and speech-language pathologist. The reliability, validity, and efficacy of the translated Pedi-EAT-10 were analyzed to ensure it could be used to identify pediatric dysphagia and feeding problems.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 had significant clinical discriminative validity between the dysphagia group and the control group (total score = 9.6 vs. 2.6, <em>P</em> < 0.001), acceptable test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.63), and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.91 for the entire cohort). The overall performance of the test for distinguishing children with dysphagia from normal controls was acceptable, and the area under the curve was 74.8% (sensitivity = 71.9%; specificity = 69.9%). The optimal cutoff score was ≥3 on the Youdex index.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 has fair reliability and validity and can be quickly and easily completed by caregivers. The translated Ped-EAT-10 can be used as a first-line tool for assessing the need for further referral and instrumental examination.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17305,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","volume":"124 3","pages":"Pages 258-263"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Translation and validation of traditional Chinese version of the pediatric eating assessment Tool-10\",\"authors\":\"Sz-Ting Wang , Kun-Tai Kang , Wen-Chin Weng , Pin-Hung Lu , Chi-Fen Chang , Yuh-Yu Lin , Yu-Chen Lee , Chen-Yu Chen , Jing-Chun Song , Wei-Chung Hsu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jfma.2024.04.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background/Purpose</h3><div>The Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool-10 (Pedi-EAT-10) is a caregiver-administrated subjective questionnaire for evaluating swallowing and feeding disorders among children. This study translated the Pedi-EAT-10 into Traditional Chinese and tested the translated version's reliability and validity.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Pedi-EAT-10 was translated into Traditional Chinese by experts and finalized after discussion and testing. A total of 168 participants, consisting of 32 children with dysphagia from a tertiary medical center and 136 healthy controls from its Children Care Center for Employees, were recruited. All participants were assessed by an otolaryngologist and speech-language pathologist. The reliability, validity, and efficacy of the translated Pedi-EAT-10 were analyzed to ensure it could be used to identify pediatric dysphagia and feeding problems.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 had significant clinical discriminative validity between the dysphagia group and the control group (total score = 9.6 vs. 2.6, <em>P</em> < 0.001), acceptable test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.63), and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.91 for the entire cohort). The overall performance of the test for distinguishing children with dysphagia from normal controls was acceptable, and the area under the curve was 74.8% (sensitivity = 71.9%; specificity = 69.9%). The optimal cutoff score was ≥3 on the Youdex index.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 has fair reliability and validity and can be quickly and easily completed by caregivers. The translated Ped-EAT-10 can be used as a first-line tool for assessing the need for further referral and instrumental examination.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17305,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association\",\"volume\":\"124 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 258-263\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929664624002109\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Formosan Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929664624002109","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Translation and validation of traditional Chinese version of the pediatric eating assessment Tool-10
Background/Purpose
The Pediatric Eating Assessment Tool-10 (Pedi-EAT-10) is a caregiver-administrated subjective questionnaire for evaluating swallowing and feeding disorders among children. This study translated the Pedi-EAT-10 into Traditional Chinese and tested the translated version's reliability and validity.
Methods
Pedi-EAT-10 was translated into Traditional Chinese by experts and finalized after discussion and testing. A total of 168 participants, consisting of 32 children with dysphagia from a tertiary medical center and 136 healthy controls from its Children Care Center for Employees, were recruited. All participants were assessed by an otolaryngologist and speech-language pathologist. The reliability, validity, and efficacy of the translated Pedi-EAT-10 were analyzed to ensure it could be used to identify pediatric dysphagia and feeding problems.
Results
The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 had significant clinical discriminative validity between the dysphagia group and the control group (total score = 9.6 vs. 2.6, P < 0.001), acceptable test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.63), and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.91 for the entire cohort). The overall performance of the test for distinguishing children with dysphagia from normal controls was acceptable, and the area under the curve was 74.8% (sensitivity = 71.9%; specificity = 69.9%). The optimal cutoff score was ≥3 on the Youdex index.
Conclusion
The Traditional Chinese version of the Pedi-EAT-10 has fair reliability and validity and can be quickly and easily completed by caregivers. The translated Ped-EAT-10 can be used as a first-line tool for assessing the need for further referral and instrumental examination.
期刊介绍:
Journal of the Formosan Medical Association (JFMA), published continuously since 1902, is an open access international general medical journal of the Formosan Medical Association based in Taipei, Taiwan. It is indexed in Current Contents/ Clinical Medicine, Medline, ciSearch, CAB Abstracts, Embase, SIIC Data Bases, Research Alert, BIOSIS, Biological Abstracts, Scopus and ScienceDirect.
As a general medical journal, research related to clinical practice and research in all fields of medicine and related disciplines are considered for publication. Article types considered include perspectives, reviews, original papers, case reports, brief communications, correspondence and letters to the editor.