Development of an oral health outcome measure for children aged 6 to 14 years
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The impact that oral and orofacial conditions have on the well-being of children has not been studied as no adequate measure is available. The research was undertaken to design the Child Oral Health Quality of Life Questionnaire (COHQoL) to assess the oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) of 6–14-year-old children and their families. It was planned to consist of a Parental Perceptions Questionnaire (PPQ), a Family Impact Scale (FIS), and Child Perceptions Questionnaires for 6–7- (CPQ6–7); 8–10- (CPQ8–10), and 11–14-year-olds (CPQ 11–14). This thesis reports on the development of the PPQ and the CPQ11–14 and testing of their discriminative properties. It also explores the adequacy of parents as information providers in paediatric health outcome research by examining the relationship between the PPQ and the CPQ11–14 reports and the extent, nature and predictors of “Don't know” responses given by parents. The PPQ and the CPQ11–14 were constructed according to the process derived from the theory of measurement and scale development. Preliminary item pools were developed through reviews of relevant literature and interviews with health professionals (n = 17), parents (n = 33) and children (n = 11). The items rated the most frequent and bothersome by parents (n = 208) and children (n = 83) were selected for the questionnaires. Construct validity testing involved 231 parents and 123 children, of whom 79 and 65 provided data for the assessment of test-retest reliability of the respective questionnaires. Both questionnaires demonstrated satisfactory validity and reliability. There were no systematic differences between mothers and their children at the group level. However, there was a substantial disagreement at the individual level and some parents exhibited limited knowledge, particularly with respect to emotional and social consequences. Therefore, the studies indicated that data should be obtained from children whenever this is possible and that parents should be used as classic ‘proxies’ only when children are unable to report on their OHRQoL. As the PPQ and the CPQ11–14 have been tested on clinical child populations, their validity and reliability have to be demonstrated in non-clinical settings for their use in surveys of general child populations. Their application in intervention studies requires that their evaluative properties (longitudinal construct validity and responsiveness) are established.
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 | 0,007 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 ».