Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a self-administered Urdu version of the child oral impacts on daily performances index among 11–12-year old children in Lahore, Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Child Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (Child-OIDP) index was developed to assess children’s oral health-related quality of life. This study aimed to culturally adapt the self-administered Child-OIDP index into Urdu, evaluate its psychometric properties, and provide an initial estimate of oral impacts among 11–12-year-old children in Lahore, Pakistan. The translation of the Child-OIDP index from English to Urdu was performed, and the content and face validity of the initial Urdu version were evaluated by experts and 11–12-year-old children, respectively. The psychometric properties of the Urdu Child-OIDP were assessed by administering the index to 264 children aged 11–12 from five schools in the Lahore district. Psychometric properties were evaluated using criterion and construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and global self-rated oral items, followed by an oral examination. The standardized Cronbach’s alpha was 0.77, and the weighted Kappa was 0.94 (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.98). The index exhibited significant associations with subjective outcome measures, dental problem history, and dental caries status (p = 0.001). Children reporting poor oral health, lower satisfaction with oral health, and experiencing oral impacts demonstrated higher Child-OIDP scores. Additionally, children with dental caries and perceived treatment needs exhibited higher Child-OIDP scores, indicating poorer Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL). The prevalence of oral impacts was 88.3% (mean score = 17.8, standard deviation (SD) =14.7). Eating performance was the most affected while speaking was the performance least affected, while toothache and sensitive teeth were identified as the two most common causes of oral impacts. Toothache was the primary cause of condition-specific impacts, responsible for the majority of oral impacts. This study demonstrates that the self-administered Urdu Child-OIDP index is a valid and reliable tool for assessing OHRQoL among 11–12-year-old children in Lahore, Pakistan.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".