Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10)
Objectives: The Eating Assessment Tool is a self-administered, symptom-specific outcome instrument for dysphagia. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10). Methods: The investigation consisted of 4 phases: 1) line-item genera...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology rhinology & laryngology, 2008-12, Vol.117 (12), p.919-924 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 924 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 919 |
| container_title | Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology |
| container_volume | 117 |
| creator | Belafsky, Peter C. Mouadeb, Debbie A. Rees, Catherine J. Pryor, Jan C. Postma, Gregory N. Allen, Jacqueline Leonard, Rebecca J. |
| description | Objectives:
The Eating Assessment Tool is a self-administered, symptom-specific outcome instrument for dysphagia. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10).
Methods:
The investigation consisted of 4 phases: 1) line-item generation, 2) line-item reduction and reliability, 3) normative data generation, and 4) validity analysis. All data were collected prospectively. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient. Normative data were obtained by administering the instrument to a community cohort of healthy volunteers. Validity was assessed by administering the instrument before and after dysphagia treatment and by evaluating survey differences between normal persons and those with known diagnoses.
Results:
A total of 629 surveys were administered to 482 patients. The internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) of the final instrument was 0.960. The test-retest intra-item correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.91. The mean (±SD) EAT-10 score of the normal cohort was 0.40 ± 1.01. The mean EAT-10 score was 23.58 ± 13.18 for patients with esophageal dysphagia, 23.10 ± 12.22 for those with oropharyngeal dysphagia, 9.19 ± 12.60 for those with voice disorders, 22.42 ± 14.06 for those with head and neck cancer, and 11.71 ± 9.61 for those with reflux. The patients with oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia and a history of head and neck cancer had a significantly higher EAT-10 score than did those with reflux or voice disorders (p < 0.001). The mean EAT-10 score of the patients with dysphagia improved from 19.87 ± 10.5 to 5.2 ± 7.4 after treatment (p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
The EAT-10 has displayed excellent internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and criterion-based validity. The normative data suggest that an EAT-10 score of 3 or higher is abnormal. The instrument may be utilized to document the initial dysphagia severity and monitor the treatment response in persons with a wide array of swallowing disorders. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/000348940811701210 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69942735</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_000348940811701210</sage_id><sourcerecordid>1622272971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-94c0045c08ca01f3e66a6774f181eba51c8a3f95d1c5d674a4bfe43b965497583</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kF9LwzAUxYMobk6_gA9SBEUf6nKbpGmeZIz5BwaCTPGtpGkyM7J2Nu3Dvr0tKw4UfLoc-J1zLgehc8B3AJyPMcaEJoLipJUYIsAHaAiCkpDx6OMQDTsg7IgBOvF-1UrKcHSMBiCAYkbEEN2_S2dzW28DWeTBq3ZWZtZ1ujRB_amDmaxtsQwm3mvv17qog0VZuuBmNlmEgG9P0ZGRzuuz_o7Q28NsMX0K5y-Pz9PJPFQ0pnUoqOrKFU6UxGCIjmMZc04NJKAzyUAlkhjBclAsjzmVNDOakkzEjArOEjJC17vcTVV-NdrX6dp6pZ2ThS4bn8ZC0IgT1oKXv8BV2VRF-1saARcQU4haKNpBqiq9r7RJN5Vdy2qbAk67bdO_27amiz65ydY631v6MVvgqgekV9KZShbK-h8uwkIQSrqg8Y7zcqn37_1T_Q2l4IpX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>217916412</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10)</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Belafsky, Peter C. ; Mouadeb, Debbie A. ; Rees, Catherine J. ; Pryor, Jan C. ; Postma, Gregory N. ; Allen, Jacqueline ; Leonard, Rebecca J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Belafsky, Peter C. ; Mouadeb, Debbie A. ; Rees, Catherine J. ; Pryor, Jan C. ; Postma, Gregory N. ; Allen, Jacqueline ; Leonard, Rebecca J.</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives:
The Eating Assessment Tool is a self-administered, symptom-specific outcome instrument for dysphagia. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10).
Methods:
The investigation consisted of 4 phases: 1) line-item generation, 2) line-item reduction and reliability, 3) normative data generation, and 4) validity analysis. All data were collected prospectively. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient. Normative data were obtained by administering the instrument to a community cohort of healthy volunteers. Validity was assessed by administering the instrument before and after dysphagia treatment and by evaluating survey differences between normal persons and those with known diagnoses.
Results:
A total of 629 surveys were administered to 482 patients. The internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) of the final instrument was 0.960. The test-retest intra-item correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.91. The mean (±SD) EAT-10 score of the normal cohort was 0.40 ± 1.01. The mean EAT-10 score was 23.58 ± 13.18 for patients with esophageal dysphagia, 23.10 ± 12.22 for those with oropharyngeal dysphagia, 9.19 ± 12.60 for those with voice disorders, 22.42 ± 14.06 for those with head and neck cancer, and 11.71 ± 9.61 for those with reflux. The patients with oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia and a history of head and neck cancer had a significantly higher EAT-10 score than did those with reflux or voice disorders (p < 0.001). The mean EAT-10 score of the patients with dysphagia improved from 19.87 ± 10.5 to 5.2 ± 7.4 after treatment (p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
The EAT-10 has displayed excellent internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and criterion-based validity. The normative data suggest that an EAT-10 score of 3 or higher is abnormal. The instrument may be utilized to document the initial dysphagia severity and monitor the treatment response in persons with a wide array of swallowing disorders.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-4894</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-572X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/000348940811701210</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19140539</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AORHA2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis ; Esophageal Diseases - complications ; Esophagus ; Female ; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - complications ; Head and Neck Neoplasms - complications ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Other diseases. Semiology ; Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology ; Reproducibility of Results ; Severity of Illness Index ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Voice Disorders - complications</subject><ispartof>Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology, 2008-12, Vol.117 (12), p.919-924</ispartof><rights>2008 SAGE Publications</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Annals Publishing Company Dec 2008</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-94c0045c08ca01f3e66a6774f181eba51c8a3f95d1c5d674a4bfe43b965497583</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-94c0045c08ca01f3e66a6774f181eba51c8a3f95d1c5d674a4bfe43b965497583</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/000348940811701210$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/000348940811701210$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21818,27923,27924,43620,43621</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=20993430$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19140539$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Belafsky, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mouadeb, Debbie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rees, Catherine J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pryor, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Postma, Gregory N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allen, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leonard, Rebecca J.</creatorcontrib><title>Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10)</title><title>Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology</title><addtitle>Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol</addtitle><description>Objectives:
The Eating Assessment Tool is a self-administered, symptom-specific outcome instrument for dysphagia. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10).
Methods:
The investigation consisted of 4 phases: 1) line-item generation, 2) line-item reduction and reliability, 3) normative data generation, and 4) validity analysis. All data were collected prospectively. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient. Normative data were obtained by administering the instrument to a community cohort of healthy volunteers. Validity was assessed by administering the instrument before and after dysphagia treatment and by evaluating survey differences between normal persons and those with known diagnoses.
Results:
A total of 629 surveys were administered to 482 patients. The internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) of the final instrument was 0.960. The test-retest intra-item correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.91. The mean (±SD) EAT-10 score of the normal cohort was 0.40 ± 1.01. The mean EAT-10 score was 23.58 ± 13.18 for patients with esophageal dysphagia, 23.10 ± 12.22 for those with oropharyngeal dysphagia, 9.19 ± 12.60 for those with voice disorders, 22.42 ± 14.06 for those with head and neck cancer, and 11.71 ± 9.61 for those with reflux. The patients with oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia and a history of head and neck cancer had a significantly higher EAT-10 score than did those with reflux or voice disorders (p < 0.001). The mean EAT-10 score of the patients with dysphagia improved from 19.87 ± 10.5 to 5.2 ± 7.4 after treatment (p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
The EAT-10 has displayed excellent internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and criterion-based validity. The normative data suggest that an EAT-10 score of 3 or higher is abnormal. The instrument may be utilized to document the initial dysphagia severity and monitor the treatment response in persons with a wide array of swallowing disorders.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Esophageal Diseases - complications</subject><subject>Esophagus</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - complications</subject><subject>Head and Neck Neoplasms - complications</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Other diseases. Semiology</subject><subject>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Voice Disorders - complications</subject><issn>0003-4894</issn><issn>1943-572X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2008</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kF9LwzAUxYMobk6_gA9SBEUf6nKbpGmeZIz5BwaCTPGtpGkyM7J2Nu3Dvr0tKw4UfLoc-J1zLgehc8B3AJyPMcaEJoLipJUYIsAHaAiCkpDx6OMQDTsg7IgBOvF-1UrKcHSMBiCAYkbEEN2_S2dzW28DWeTBq3ZWZtZ1ujRB_amDmaxtsQwm3mvv17qog0VZuuBmNlmEgG9P0ZGRzuuz_o7Q28NsMX0K5y-Pz9PJPFQ0pnUoqOrKFU6UxGCIjmMZc04NJKAzyUAlkhjBclAsjzmVNDOakkzEjArOEjJC17vcTVV-NdrX6dp6pZ2ThS4bn8ZC0IgT1oKXv8BV2VRF-1saARcQU4haKNpBqiq9r7RJN5Vdy2qbAk67bdO_27amiz65ydY631v6MVvgqgekV9KZShbK-h8uwkIQSrqg8Y7zcqn37_1T_Q2l4IpX</recordid><startdate>20081201</startdate><enddate>20081201</enddate><creator>Belafsky, Peter C.</creator><creator>Mouadeb, Debbie A.</creator><creator>Rees, Catherine J.</creator><creator>Pryor, Jan C.</creator><creator>Postma, Gregory N.</creator><creator>Allen, Jacqueline</creator><creator>Leonard, Rebecca J.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Annals Publishing Compagny</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20081201</creationdate><title>Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10)</title><author>Belafsky, Peter C. ; Mouadeb, Debbie A. ; Rees, Catherine J. ; Pryor, Jan C. ; Postma, Gregory N. ; Allen, Jacqueline ; Leonard, Rebecca J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-94c0045c08ca01f3e66a6774f181eba51c8a3f95d1c5d674a4bfe43b965497583</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2008</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Esophageal Diseases - complications</topic><topic>Esophagus</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - complications</topic><topic>Head and Neck Neoplasms - complications</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Other diseases. Semiology</topic><topic>Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Voice Disorders - complications</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Belafsky, Peter C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mouadeb, Debbie A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rees, Catherine J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pryor, Jan C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Postma, Gregory N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Allen, Jacqueline</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Leonard, Rebecca J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><jtitle>Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Belafsky, Peter C.</au><au>Mouadeb, Debbie A.</au><au>Rees, Catherine J.</au><au>Pryor, Jan C.</au><au>Postma, Gregory N.</au><au>Allen, Jacqueline</au><au>Leonard, Rebecca J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10)</atitle><jtitle>Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol</addtitle><date>2008-12-01</date><risdate>2008</risdate><volume>117</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>919</spage><epage>924</epage><pages>919-924</pages><issn>0003-4894</issn><eissn>1943-572X</eissn><coden>AORHA2</coden><abstract>Objectives:
The Eating Assessment Tool is a self-administered, symptom-specific outcome instrument for dysphagia. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the 10-item Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10).
Methods:
The investigation consisted of 4 phases: 1) line-item generation, 2) line-item reduction and reliability, 3) normative data generation, and 4) validity analysis. All data were collected prospectively. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was evaluated with the Pearson product moment correlation coefficient. Normative data were obtained by administering the instrument to a community cohort of healthy volunteers. Validity was assessed by administering the instrument before and after dysphagia treatment and by evaluating survey differences between normal persons and those with known diagnoses.
Results:
A total of 629 surveys were administered to 482 patients. The internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) of the final instrument was 0.960. The test-retest intra-item correlation coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.91. The mean (±SD) EAT-10 score of the normal cohort was 0.40 ± 1.01. The mean EAT-10 score was 23.58 ± 13.18 for patients with esophageal dysphagia, 23.10 ± 12.22 for those with oropharyngeal dysphagia, 9.19 ± 12.60 for those with voice disorders, 22.42 ± 14.06 for those with head and neck cancer, and 11.71 ± 9.61 for those with reflux. The patients with oropharyngeal and esophageal dysphagia and a history of head and neck cancer had a significantly higher EAT-10 score than did those with reflux or voice disorders (p < 0.001). The mean EAT-10 score of the patients with dysphagia improved from 19.87 ± 10.5 to 5.2 ± 7.4 after treatment (p < 0.001).
Conclusions:
The EAT-10 has displayed excellent internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and criterion-based validity. The normative data suggest that an EAT-10 score of 3 or higher is abnormal. The instrument may be utilized to document the initial dysphagia severity and monitor the treatment response in persons with a wide array of swallowing disorders.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>19140539</pmid><doi>10.1177/000348940811701210</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0003-4894 |
| ispartof | Annals of otology, rhinology & laryngology, 2008-12, Vol.117 (12), p.919-924 |
| issn | 0003-4894 1943-572X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_69942735 |
| source | MEDLINE; SAGE Complete A-Z List |
| subjects | Aged Biological and medical sciences Deglutition Disorders - diagnosis Esophageal Diseases - complications Esophagus Female Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen Gastroesophageal Reflux - complications Head and Neck Neoplasms - complications Humans Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Other diseases. Semiology Otorhinolaryngology. Stomatology Reproducibility of Results Severity of Illness Index Surveys and Questionnaires Voice Disorders - complications |
| title | Validity and Reliability of the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T13%3A36%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Validity%20and%20Reliability%20of%20the%20Eating%20Assessment%20Tool%20(EAT-10)&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20otology,%20rhinology%20&%20laryngology&rft.au=Belafsky,%20Peter%20C.&rft.date=2008-12-01&rft.volume=117&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=919&rft.epage=924&rft.pages=919-924&rft.issn=0003-4894&rft.eissn=1943-572X&rft.coden=AORHA2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/000348940811701210&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1622272971%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=217916412&rft_id=info:pmid/19140539&rft_sage_id=10.1177_000348940811701210&rfr_iscdi=true |