Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: We investigated the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Screening Index for Voice Disorder (SIVD-TR).
METHODS: The original SIVD1 translated into Turkish, followed by a translation back into English by a linguist. The text was finalized by an evaluation committee. This translated version was then administered to a cohort of 223 teachers in Ankara, Turkey, encompassing both those with and without voice disorders (WVD and WOVD). After a duration of 7-14days, a random selection of 53 teachers underwent the questionnaire once more. Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of the index. Cronbach\'s alpha and test-retest methods were used to scale the reliability. A cutoff point was determined to decide the risk of a voice disorder, by using a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve. The validation process is concluded by computing sensitivity and specificity values, comparing mean scores between WVD and WOVD subjects, and finally examining correlations between SIVD-TR and the Turkish version of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI-10).
RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability exhibited high significance, with Cronbach\'s alpha measuring at 0.872. The test-retest correlation coefficient for the total scores was 0.80. The SIVD-TR consists of 12 symptoms, each accounting for 1 point on the scale. The identified cutoff for identifying the risk of a voice disorder is 4 (four) symptoms, with a sensitivity of 55.2%. A correlation of 69% was observed between SIVD-TR and VHI-TR. A significant association was noted between the risk of having a voice disorder and the actual presence of a voice disorder. Subjects with a voice disorder exhibited higher mean SIVD scores, providing further evidence of the questionnaire\'s discriminative validity.
CONCLUSIONS: The Turkish adaptation of SIVD demonstrated both reliability and validity, establishing itself as a robust tool for identifying voice disorders.
METHODS: The original SIVD1 translated into Turkish, followed by a translation back into English by a linguist. The text was finalized by an evaluation committee. This translated version was then administered to a cohort of 223 teachers in Ankara, Turkey, encompassing both those with and without voice disorders (WVD and WOVD). After a duration of 7-14days, a random selection of 53 teachers underwent the questionnaire once more. Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of the index. Cronbach\'s alpha and test-retest methods were used to scale the reliability. A cutoff point was determined to decide the risk of a voice disorder, by using a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve. The validation process is concluded by computing sensitivity and specificity values, comparing mean scores between WVD and WOVD subjects, and finally examining correlations between SIVD-TR and the Turkish version of the Voice Handicap Index (VHI-10).
RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability exhibited high significance, with Cronbach\'s alpha measuring at 0.872. The test-retest correlation coefficient for the total scores was 0.80. The SIVD-TR consists of 12 symptoms, each accounting for 1 point on the scale. The identified cutoff for identifying the risk of a voice disorder is 4 (four) symptoms, with a sensitivity of 55.2%. A correlation of 69% was observed between SIVD-TR and VHI-TR. A significant association was noted between the risk of having a voice disorder and the actual presence of a voice disorder. Subjects with a voice disorder exhibited higher mean SIVD scores, providing further evidence of the questionnaire\'s discriminative validity.
CONCLUSIONS: The Turkish adaptation of SIVD demonstrated both reliability and validity, establishing itself as a robust tool for identifying voice disorders.
摘要：
目的：我们调查了土耳其语版本的语音障碍筛查指数（SIVD-TR）的信度和效度。
方法：原始SIVD1翻译成土耳其语，然后由语言学家翻译成英文。案文由一个评价委员会定稿。然后将此翻译版本分配给安卡拉的223名教师，土耳其,包括有和没有语音障碍的人(WVD和WOVD)。在7-14天的持续时间后，随机选择的53名教师再次接受了问卷。进行统计分析以评价指标的信度和效度。Cronbach的α和重测方法用于衡量可靠性。确定了一个临界点来决定语音障碍的风险，通过使用接收器工作特性曲线。验证过程通过计算灵敏度和特异性值来结束，比较WVD和WOVD受试者的平均得分，最后检查SIVD-TR和土耳其语版本的语音障碍索引（VHI-10）之间的相关性。
结果：内部一致性可靠性具有很高的意义，克朗巴赫的阿尔法测量为0.872。总分的重测相关系数为0.80。SIVD-TR由12种症状组成，每个占量表上的1分。确定语音障碍风险的界限是4（四）种症状，灵敏度为55.2%。在SIVD-TR和VHI-TR之间观察到69%的相关性。注意到患有语音障碍的风险与语音障碍的实际存在之间存在显着关联。患有语音障碍的受试者表现出更高的平均SIVD评分，为问卷的辨别效度提供进一步的证据。
结论：SIVD的土耳其语适应证明了信度和效度，将自己确立为识别语音障碍的强大工具。
方法：原始SIVD1翻译成土耳其语，然后由语言学家翻译成英文。案文由一个评价委员会定稿。然后将此翻译版本分配给安卡拉的223名教师，土耳其,包括有和没有语音障碍的人(WVD和WOVD)。在7-14天的持续时间后，随机选择的53名教师再次接受了问卷。进行统计分析以评价指标的信度和效度。Cronbach的α和重测方法用于衡量可靠性。确定了一个临界点来决定语音障碍的风险，通过使用接收器工作特性曲线。验证过程通过计算灵敏度和特异性值来结束，比较WVD和WOVD受试者的平均得分，最后检查SIVD-TR和土耳其语版本的语音障碍索引（VHI-10）之间的相关性。
结果：内部一致性可靠性具有很高的意义，克朗巴赫的阿尔法测量为0.872。总分的重测相关系数为0.80。SIVD-TR由12种症状组成，每个占量表上的1分。确定语音障碍风险的界限是4（四）种症状，灵敏度为55.2%。在SIVD-TR和VHI-TR之间观察到69%的相关性。注意到患有语音障碍的风险与语音障碍的实际存在之间存在显着关联。患有语音障碍的受试者表现出更高的平均SIVD评分，为问卷的辨别效度提供进一步的证据。
结论：SIVD的土耳其语适应证明了信度和效度，将自己确立为识别语音障碍的强大工具。
