The Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) was conceptually developed in the United States from data collected from 482 patients, for use as a self-administered survey regarding risk identification of dysphagia and symptoms related to clinical response to treatment. The purpose of this study is to present the cultural equivalence of the Brazilian version of the EAT-10. The process followed the Scientific Advisory Committee of Medical Outcome Trust (SACMOT). The questionnaire was translated by two Brazilian bilingual speech-language pathologists, aware of the purpose of this study. A back translation was performed by a third Brazilian speech-language pathologist, bilingual and English teacher that had not participated in the previous stage. After comparing both translations, a final version of the questionnaire was produced and called Instrumento de Autoavaliação da Alimentação (EAT-10). It was administered to 107 adult inpatients of the Hospital São Paulo, cwith request for bedside clinical evaluation of swallow. During the process of translation and cultural adaptation, no item was modified and/or suppressed. The EAT-10 maintained the same structure as the original American English version with ten questions, of which three of functional domain, three of emotional domain and four of physical symptoms domain. The cultural equivalence of the Brazilian version of the EAT-10 was demonstrated, being a score of three points or above it the cutoff for dysphagia risk, also for the Brazilian population.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 17 March 2014.
All research outputs
#21,157,205
of 25,986,827 outputs
Outputs from CoDAS
#1
of 5 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,154
of 323,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from CoDAS
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,986,827 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.4. This one scored the same or higher as 4 of them.
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 323,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them
