Measuring parental-caregiver perceptions of child oral health-related quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Parental-Caregiver Perceptions Questionnaire (P-CPQ) is an instrument that assesses a parent's or a caregiver's perceptions regarding the impact of children's oral health status on quality of life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the P-CPQ. Following translation and cross-cultural adaptation, the P-CPQ was tested on 123 parents and caregivers of children between 11 and 14 years of age with dental caries and malocclusions. The parents/caregivers were recruited at dental clinics of the Federal University of Minas Gerais, where their children were receiving dental care. Psychometric properties were assessed through internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity and discriminant validity. The mean P-CPQ score was 13.01 (SD=12.14) for the dental caries group and 16.57 (SD=13.13) for the malocclusion group. Internal reliability was confirmed by a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.84. Test-retest reliability revealed satisfactory reproducibility (ICC=0.83). Construct validity was satisfactory, demonstrating significant correlations between global indicators and the total scale. The P-CPQ score was able to discriminate between different parental/caregiver perceptions of oral conditions in their children (dental caries and malocclusion). The results for the Brazilian version of the P-CPQ confirm that this questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument to assess parental perceptions on the impact that oral health status has on children's life quality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".