Premium
The M inimal E ating O bservation F orm‐ II ( MEOF‐II ): cross‐cultural validation of the C hinese version for people with stroke
Author(s) -
Wang Ting,
Jiang Hong,
Westergren Albert,
Wang Junqiao,
Wang Liang
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of evaluation in clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.737
H-Index - 73
eISSN - 1365-2753
pISSN - 1356-1294
DOI - 10.1111/jep.12455
Subject(s) - cronbach's alpha , exploratory factor analysis , reliability (semiconductor) , psychology , confirmatory factor analysis , discriminant validity , convergent validity , construct validity , scale (ratio) , stroke (engine) , psychometrics , clinical psychology , computer science , structural equation modeling , machine learning , internal consistency , mechanical engineering , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics , engineering
Rationale, aims and objectives Eating difficulties are common among patients affected by stroke. A valid, reliable instrument for assessing eating difficulties in people with stroke is needed. The aim of this study was to translate the Minimal Eating Observation Form – version II (MEOF‐II) for patients with stroke into Chinese and to comprehensively evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods The scale of the original MEOF ‐ II form was translated into C hinese using the cross‐culture translation method, and 125 participants with stroke were assessed. Data were analysed by content validity index, C ronbach's alpha, correlations and exploratory factor analysis ( EFA ). Results Reliability and validity were demonstrated for the scale. A three‐factor structure was illustrated by EFA , and construct validity was demonstrated by good convergent and discriminant validity. Conclusions The C hinese version ( Ch ‐ MEOF ‐ II ) shows good reliability and validity in this study and can be applicable to assess eating difficulties in people with stroke; The Ch ‐ MEOF ‐ II allows the early recognition of eating difficulties and thus provides guidance of proper clinical interventions. For future study, a confirmatory factor analysis may need to confirm the three‐factor structure identified in this study. Furthermore, a cross‐cultural comparison can be conducted with the availability of the three different validated language versions of the MEOF ‐ II form.