Reliability and convergent and discriminant validity of the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP Child’s version)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the current study was to assess the reliability as well as the convergent and discriminant validity of the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP). The questionnaire consisted of five domains that assessed oral health, functional well-being, social-emotional well-being, school environment, and self-image. COHIP was designed to measure self-reported oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of children between ages 8 and 15 years old, using both positively and negatively worded items. METHODS: Children were recruited from pediatric, orthodontic, and craniofacial clinical settings in the USA and Canada. A comparison group of children not seeking dental treatment was recruited from two US elementary schools. Participants included 157 pediatric, 152 orthodontic and 110 patients with craniofacial anomalies, and 104 community-based participants. Scale reliability was assessed with Cronbach's alpha coefficient. Retest reliability was examined by intraclass correlation and paired t-test for a subset of participants who did not report a health change. Discriminant validity was assessed in two ways: (i) the COHIP scores of the four groups of children (three clinical and one community-dwelling) were compared by anova and (ii) for two of the clinical groups, the association between COHIP scores and clinical indices was calculated. Convergent validity was examined using partial Spearman correlations between COHIP scores and Global Health Ratings controlling for demographic variables. RESULTS: The children (n = 523) averaged 11.6 years (SD = 1.60); 51.6 % were female; and represented diverse ethnicities (black = 22.4%, Latino = 32.1%, white = 35.1%, other 10.4%). Overall COHIP scores ranged from 28 to 135 (mean +/- SD, 99.0 +/- 19.2) for the children. Scale reliability for the overall COHIP was excellent: Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.91 for the overall score. The test-retest reliability of the overall COHIP was also excellent (ICC = 0.84) and there was no statistically significant shift in scores over time. Discriminant validity was supported by significant differences (P = 0.003 overall COHIP) among the three clinical groups: the craniofacial group reported the lowest overall COHIP quality of life scores of the clinical groups. Within the pediatric dental group, children with greater dental decay reported lower COHIP scores suggesting a lower OHRQoL (r = -0.26, P = 0.02) and within the orthodontic group, children with larger overjet reported lower COHIP scores (r = -0.25, P = 0.005). Controlling for the effect of the participants' age, gender, and ethnicity, the association between the overall COHIP score and Global Health rating was statistically significant (P < 0.05) and similar in strength for the three clinical groups (pediatric dental = 0.29, orthodontic = 0.23, and craniofacial = 0.24) and highest for the community group (0.36). CONCLUSION: The overall COHIP showed excellent scale reliability overall and test-retest reliability. Both discriminant and convergent validity of the COHIP were supported by the comparisons among and within the four groups of children. Further testing will examine the utility of the instrument in both clinical and epidemiological samples.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».