↓ Skip to main content

Consensus on level descriptors for a functional children's eating and drinking activity scale

Overview of attention for article published in Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, February 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
60 X users

Readers on

mendeley
7 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Consensus on level descriptors for a functional children's eating and drinking activity scale
Published in
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, February 2023
DOI 10.1111/dmcn.15542
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily Hanks, Alexandra Stewart, Claudia Kate Au‐Yeung, Emily Johnson, Christina H. Smith

Abstract

To agree wording of level descriptors for a measure of functional outcome of children's eating and drinking. An online, modified Delphi method was used to gather feedback on current level descriptor wording and generate rewording suggestions. Thirty speech and language therapists, working in a variety of settings and geographical locations, were invited to be part of the Delphi expert panel. Content analysis was used to evaluate participants' comments and develop consensus level descriptors. Consensus for acceptable wording was set at 80% agreement. Face validity was assessed using 5-point Likert scales. Nineteen expert speech and language therapists (median experience 18 years) completed round one; 15 out of 19 completed round two. Level descriptor rating reached 80% agreement in two rounds. Additionally, 93% of participants agreed the scale would accurately capture change in their setting, with 87% likely to use the scale in practice. This study has produced agreed wording for a functional measure of eating and drinking activity suitable for use with paediatrics feeding disorders, regardless of disease aetiology, presentation, age, or setting. Potential for widespread use is supported. Further evaluation of the tool's reliability and validity is required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 43%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 29%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 29%
Psychology 2 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 August 2023.
All research outputs
#958,972
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
#69
of 4,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,542
of 426,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
#5
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 426,073 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.