The Adaptation of the Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI) into Greek: A Reliability and Validity Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI) is an informant rating scale designed to measure changes in functional communication in people with aphasia (PWA) from the carer's perspective. It offers a comprehensive view of aphasia's impact on everyday communication situations, aiding clinicians in designing personalized intervention plans. The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the CETI into Greek (CETI-GR) and validate its psychometric properties. The CETI-GR was translated into Greek using back-translation. A pilot and a content validity study ensured its acceptability. The study involved 30 people with aphasia and 30 carers. The CETI-GR's psychometric properties were evaluated, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, and validity measures. The CETI-GR demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α > 0.95) and excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC ≥ 0.93). Excellent consistency was revealed when testing the CETI responses given only by PWA (α = 0.91) versus their carers (α = 0.97). Test-retest reliability was high (ICC = 0.88). Significant correlations between the CETI-GR and measures of language severity, functional communication, and quality of life supported convergent validity. The CETI-GR is a reliable tool for assessing functional communication in chronic aphasia. Its Greek adaptation enhances aphasia rehabilitation, enabling person-centered care and improving the quality of life for people with aphasia and carers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".