↓ Skip to main content

Development of the Arabic Version of Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI)

Overview of attention for article published in Dysphagia (0179051X), May 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Development of the Arabic Version of Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI)
Published in
Dysphagia (0179051X), May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00455-014-9528-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohamed Farahat, Khalid H. Malki, Tamer A. Mesallam, Manal Bukhari, Sami Alharethy

Abstract

The Dysphagia Handicap Index (DHI) is a 25-item self-administered questionnaire. It is a noninvasive tool for measuring the handicapping effect of dysphagia on the physical, functional, and emotional aspects of people's lives. The purposes of the present study were to develop an Arabic version of the DHI and to evaluate its validity, consistency, and reliability in the normal Arabic population with oropharyngeal dysphagia. This was a prospective study that was carried out at the Communication and Swallowing Disorders Unit, King Saud University. The generated Arabic DHI was administered to 94 patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia and 98 control subjects. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated. The results of the patients and the control group were compared. The Arabic DHI showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.95). Also, good test-retest reliability was found for the total scores of the Arabic DHI (r = 0.9, p = 0.001). There was a significant difference between the DHI scores of the control group and those of the oropharyngeal dysphagia group (p < 0.001). This study demonstrated that the Arabic DHI is a valid tool for self-assessment of the handicapping effect of dysphagia on the physical, functional, and emotional aspects of patients and can be used by Arabic language speakers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 30%
Unspecified 4 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 1 5%
Other 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 55%
Unspecified 4 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 15%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

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 21 May 2014.
All research outputs
#10,841,485
of 12,230,159 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#698
of 746 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,115
of 196,388 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia (0179051X)
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,230,159 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 746 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 196,388 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.