Direction of wording and responses to items in oral health‐related quality of life questionnaires for children and their parents
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: In order to minimize acquiescence response set bias, it is often recommended that questionnaires measuring attitudes, behaviours or health states contain items worded positively and negatively. It has also been suggested that when measuring health status this approach means that both the negative and positive dimensions of health can be assessed. This study aimed at assessing the performance of negatively and positively worded items in questionnaires to measure child and parent perceptions of child oral health-related quality of life. METHODS: Both the child and parent questionnaire included four pairs of items, one negatively worded and one positively worded, that assessed eating, appearance, oral self-care and self-confidence. The response format was a five-point Likert frequency scale with a 'Don't know' option. Prior to analysis, the positive items were reverse coded. The relative performance of the two sets of items was assessed by means of comparisons of the proportions with 'Don't know' responses or missing values, mean item scores and proportions with the two highest frequency codes. Kappa statistics and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess the agreement between the negative and reverse-coded positive items and scores and the agreement between child and parent pairs. Factor analysis was used to determine if the two sets of items were measuring the same underlying construct. RESULTS: The study was completed by 91 Canadian children and 100 parents (91 child-parent pairs) recruited from clinics treating paediatric, orthodontic and oro-facial conditions. The positively worded items elicited substantially more 'Don't know' responses or missing values than the negatively worded items and failed to discriminate between groups. In addition, mean item scores and proportions with the highest frequency codes were substantially larger for reverse-coded positive than negative items. Agreement between pairs of items was slight. Child-parent agreement was substantial for a scale constructed from the negative items but only moderate for the positive items. Factor analysis revealed that the two sets of items loaded onto different factors. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the positively worded items was unsatisfactory and their use in oral health-related quality of life indexes, either to reduce response set or assess positive oral health, is at best questionable.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».