Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires for Use with Persons with Swallowing Disorders

Zraick, Richard I.; Atcherson, Samuel R.; Ham, Bonnie K.

doi:10.1007/s00455-011-9373-x

Cited by 21 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The EAT-10 is quick to administer at less than two minutes (Belafsky et al, 2008). In a comparison of swallowing-specific questionnaires, the EAT-10 was found to be more easily read and understood than others (Zraick, Atcherson, & Ham, 2012), supporting its use in progressive neurological populations with associated cognitive decline. The EAT-10 does not contain subscales or visual scales that require the calculation of a raw score, further adding to its ease of use.…”

Section: Advantages-eat-10mentioning

confidence: 89%

“…The complexity of the wording in the SWAL-QOL also restricts its use in populations with lower literacy levels (Silbergleit et al, 2012). The wording of the SWAL-QOL is argued to be more complex compared to similar assessments (Zraick et al, 2012), and the patient may require increased cueing to complete the tool, further contributing to clinical burden (Silbergleit et al, 2012).…”

Section: Limitations -Swal-qolmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Systematic Review of Self-reported Swallowing Assessments in Progressive Neurological Disorders

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dysphagia experienced as a consequence of neurodegenerative disease can have severe consequences on a patient's health and well-being. Regular assessment of swallowing function can assist to achieve adequate nutrition and hydration. Here we review subjective swallowing assessments currently available are suitable for use in people with neurodegenerative disease. Measurement properties were reviewed for each tool and coverage of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (WHO ICF) was considered. Assessments were identified following a review of the published literature Instruments were reviewed on the basis of reliability and validity, as well as administrative properties, such an interpretability, acceptability, and feasibility. Tools were also evaluated according to the WHO ICF framework. In total, 19 studies were identified for full-text review from 13,315 abstracts. Nine self-reported dysphagia assessment tools suitable for use in progressive neurological disorders were identified. The Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire (SWAL-QOL) yields the strongest combination of reliability (including internal consistency and test-retest reliability) and convergent validity while simultaneously covering all WHO ICF domains. Lengthy administration time was identified as a limitation of the SWAL-QOL. The review highlights a relative lack of well-validated self-report questionnaires in dysphagia for people with progressive neurological disease. Additional validation and evaluation of the clinical utility of the tools currently available is required to further promote an informed selection of available assessments.

show abstract

Section: Advantages-eat-10mentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Limitations -Swal-qolmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Self-reported Swallowing Assessments in Progressive Neurological Disorders

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a result, this formula tends to predict grade-level scores slightly higher than other readability formulas (with the exception of the SMOG formula). Moreover, the FOG formula takes into consideration the number of hard words within the text (hard words being defined as having two syllables or more) unlike some other readability measures, such as the FORCAST or the Flesch Reading Ease formula (Zraick, Atcherson, & Ham, 2012). The FOG formula has proven to be a popular readability formula for use within the healthcare and business industries (Zraick, Atcherson, & Ham, 2012).…”

Section: Gunning Fogmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This makes it a particularly useful formula when examining non-narrative or short texts such as questionnaires, forms, tests, quizzes, or any other written materials containing incomplete sentences (Atcherson et al, 2011). Additionally, FORCAST can be labelled different or distinct from other readability formulas due to the fact that it also ignores the number of sentences and any hard punctuation within the text (Zraick, Atcherson, & Ham, 2012).…”

Section: Forcastmentioning

confidence: 99%

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

Douglas

Kelly-Campbell

2018

Am J Audiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When developing or reevaluating PROMs designed for use in adult audiologic rehabilitation, researchers should consider ways to improve the readability of their measure, as poor readability may affect the validity of the empirical data collected using the PROM. Additionally, the adequate readability of audiologic PROMs is required if patient/family-centered care values are to be adhered to within the field of adult audiologic rehabilitation.

show abstract

“…These PROs use self-reported questionnaires, assess the presence and severity of dysphagia symptoms, and measure the influence of dysphagia on a person’s HRQoL [1, 6–8]. These PROs add useful information to the clinical swallowing examination and instrumental investigations [9] and can be used as outcome measures of therapeutic interventions [1, 6–8]. The applicability and appropriateness of a PRO in a specific population depend on the target population (i.e., persons with oropharyngeal dysphagia), its feasibility and the quality of its psychometric properties (i.e., reliability and validity) [4, 10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Dutch version of the Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (DSWAL-QoL) and the adjusted DSWAL-QoL (aDSWAL-QoL) using item analysis with the Rasch model: a pilot study

Simpelaere

Nuffelen

Bodt

et al. 2017

Health Qual Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (SWAL-QoL) is considered the gold standard for assessing health-related QoL in oropharyngeal dysphagia. The Dutch translation (DSWAL-QoL) and its adjusted version (aDSWAL-QoL) have been validated using classical test theory (CTT). However, these scales have not been tested against the Rasch measurement model, which is required to establish the structural validity and objectivity of the total scale and subscale scores. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of these scales using item analysis according to the Rasch model.MethodsItem analysis with the Rasch model was performed using RUMM2030 software with previously collected data from a validation study of 108 patients. The assessment included evaluations of overall model fit, reliability, unidimensionality, threshold ordering, individual item and person fits, differential item functioning (DIF), local item dependency (LID) and targeting.ResultsThe analysis could not establish the psychometric properties of either of the scales or their subscales because they did not fit the Rasch model, and multidimensionality, disordered thresholds, DIF, and/or LID were found. The reliability and power of fit were high for the total scales (PSI = 0.93) but low for most of the subscales (PSI < 0.70). The targeting of persons and items was suboptimal. The main source of misfit was disordered thresholds for both the total scales and subscales. Based on the results of the analysis, adjustments to improve the scales were implemented as follows: disordered thresholds were rescaled, misfit items were removed and items were split for DIF. However, the multidimensionality and LID could not be resolved. The reliability and power of fit remained low for most of the subscales.ConclusionsThis study represents the first analyses of the DSWAL-QoL and aDSWAL-QoL with the Rasch model. Relying on the DSWAL-QoL and aDSWAL-QoL total and subscale scores to make conclusions regarding dysphagia-related HRQoL should be treated with caution before the structural validity and objectivity of both scales have been established. A larger and well-targeted sample is recommended to derive definitive conclusions about the items and scales. Solutions for the psychometric weaknesses suggested by the model and practical implications are discussed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-017-0639-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Questionnaires for Use with Persons with Swallowing Disorders

Cited by 21 publications

References 29 publications

A Systematic Review of Self-reported Swallowing Assessments in Progressive Neurological Disorders

A Systematic Review of Self-reported Swallowing Assessments in Progressive Neurological Disorders

Readability of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Adult Audiologic Rehabilitation

Validation of the Dutch version of the Swallowing Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (DSWAL-QoL) and the adjusted DSWAL-QoL (aDSWAL-QoL) using item analysis with the Rasch model: a pilot study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About