Oral health‐related quality of life for 8–10‐year‐old children: an assessment of a new measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to assess the reliability and construct validity of the Child Oral Health-Related Quality of Life for 8-10-year-olds (COHRQoL [8-10]) using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and to test the measurement properties of latent variables believed to define the multidimensional construct of OHRQoL. METHODS: A convenience sample of 270, year 4 children from six schools was obtained. The administered questionnaire included the 25-item COHRQoL [8-10] and the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory-School Form. The analytical method was based upon CFA using maximum likelihood estimation. A second-order factoring approach was applied to determine the extent that the latent variables tapped a single over-arching domain of quality of life. RESULTS: Seven items were withdrawn for low endorsement and poor association with resultant factors. The COHRQoL [8-10] was confirmed to measure a single construct of three latent variables invariant to gender. Internal consistency of the three scales derived comprising a total of 18 retained items was acceptable. Associations with self-esteem and with a single question on the extent that the mouth was a problem were confirmed and strengthened the construct validity of the COHRQoL [8-10] measure. CONCLUSIONS: Reliability and construct validity were demonstrated for COHRQoL [8-10] and supported the scale for adoption as an epidemiological and scientific tool for group comparisons. CFA showed that the three constructs or latent variables underlying the overall COHRQoL ratings were discrete measures that can be reliably assessed in children. Further model testing with additional data will increase generalization of these findings.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".