| Lin, L.C |
------>authors3_c= ------>paper_class1=1 ------>Impact_Factor=2.029 ------>paper_class3=2 ------>paper_class2=1 ------>vol= ------>confirm_bywho=None ------>insert_bywho=cchang ------>Jurnal_Rank=39.4 ------>authors4_c= ------>comm_author= ------>patent_EDate=None ------>authors5_c= ------>publish_day=1 ------>paper_class2Letter=None ------>page2= ------>medlineContent= ------>unit=000 ------>insert_date=20070412 ------>iam=2 ------>update_date=None ------>author=??? ------>change_event=1 ------>ISSN= ------>authors_c= ------>score=454 ------>journal_name=Alzheimer Disease Association Disorder ------>paper_name=A Chinese translation of EdFED-Q and assessment of equivalence. ------>confirm_date=None ------>tch_id=095068 ------>pmid=14657787 ------>page1= ------>fullAbstract=The purpose of this study was to translate the Edinburgh Feeding Evaluation in Dementia Questionnaire (EdFED-Q) from the original English into a Chinese language version and to assess the equivalence of the English and Chinese EdFED-Q versions. To use a directly translated instrument without minimal explanation of the procedures for determining the equivalence between the original and secondary language instrument is questionable. Ensuring equivalence of a translated Chinese version of the EdFED-Q for patients with dementia is an essential prerequisite for identifying culturally specific expressions of feeding difficulty under investigation. Phase 1 consisted of experts doing the initial translation into Chinese and then English back-translations of the questionnaire. Six experts determined the equality of the Chinese and English versions, and five monolingual nurses provided information for the C-EdFED-Q. In phase 2, two bilingual gerontological nurses rated 33 residents with dementia to determine equivalence across time. In phase 3, three groups of bilingual nurses used the Chinese, English, and finally both versions simultaneously to judge a model case~s feeding behavior on the videotape. In phase 1, the rating on the equality of the items on the Chinese and English versions was 0.969. In phase 2, kappa coefficients for all items on the C-EdFED-Q and E-EdFED-Q ranged from 0.44 to 1.00. In determining the consistency of the scores for the C-EdFED-Q and E-EdFED-Q between the two raters across time, the intraclass correlation coefficient for the absolute agreement was found to range from 0.85 to 0.90. In phase 3, except for items 6 and 9, all items showed no significant difference among the three groups. Further studies to assess the relationship between constructs and to compare it with known and predicted relationships are recommended. ------>tmu_sno=None ------>sno=14870 ------>authors2=Chang, C.C ------>authors3= ------>authors4= ------>authors5= ------>authors6= ------>authors6_c= ------>authors=Lin, L.C ------>delete_flag=0 ------>SCI_JNo=None ------>authors2_c= ------>publish_area=0 ------>updateTitle=A Chinese translation of the EdFED-Q and assessment of equivalence. ------>language=2 ------>check_flag=None ------>submit_date=None ------>country=None ------>no= ------>patent_SDate=None ------>update_bywho=None ------>publish_year=2003 ------>submit_flag=None ------>publish_month=10 |