MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Derivation and validation of the short version of the Malaysian Oral Health Impact Profile

2005· article· en· W1985486649 on OpenAlex
Roslan Saub, David Locker, Paul Allison

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Dentistry And Oral Epidemiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOral healthDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the development of a short version of the Malaysian Oral Health Impact Profile. METHODS: The 45-item OHIP(M) was shortened using a method known as the 'item frequency method'. Here, the two most frequently reported items from each of the seven OHIP(M) subscales were chosen to form the short version, designated as the S-OHIP(M). Field testing was conducted to assess the effect of different modes of administration (mail versus interview) of the short form and to test its measurement properties (reliability and validity). A total of 206 respondents completed the questionnaire. In order to carry out test-retest analysis, a second administration was carried out 15 days after the first administration on a selected subsample. RESULTS: The mail questionnaire had a lower response rate and a higher percentage of missing data than the interview administered questionnaire. However, the mail mode of administration resulted in higher scores than interview. Cronbach's alpha was 0.89 and the ICC was also 0.89. All hypotheses developed to assess validity were confirmed. CONCLUSION: The S-OHIP(M) was found to be valid and reliable and appropriate for use in the cross-sectional studies in Malaysian adult populations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it