MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411075865 · doi:10.1111/cdoe.13045

Psychometric Validation of the <scp>FACE</scp>‐Q Dental Module in Patients With Malocclusions

2025· article· en· W4411075865 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ali Tassi, Anne F. Klassen, Jessica Li, Karen W. Y. Wong Riff, Charlene Rae

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Dentistry And Oral Epidemiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicOrthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversitySickKids FoundationWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRasch modelMedicineCronbach's alphaCraniofacialDentistryReliability (semiconductor)MalocclusionPsychometricsOrthodonticsClinical psychologyPsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The FACE-Q Craniofacial Module is a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) developed for children and young adults with craniofacial conditions. We hypothesised that some of its scales may be applicable to other populations. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of FACE-Q scales for patients with dental malocclusions. METHODS: The FACE-Q Dental Module includes 5 scales from the Craniofacial Module that measure appearance (Face, Jaws, Smile and Teeth) and function (Eating/Drinking). Data were collected from patients aged 8-29 years who presented with a dental malocclusion (pre-treatment) or 1-2 years after orthodontic treatment (post-treatment) at a large university-based orthodontic specialty clinic in Canada between September 2018 and March 2020. Patients completed a paper questionnaire booklet, and data were entered into a Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) survey. The psychometric analysis was performed using Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis. RESULTS: The sample of 434 patients was aged 9 to 29 years, with 249 female and 185 male participants. The sample included 252 pre-treatment and 182 post-treatment patients. The 4 appearance scales evidenced strong psychometric performance; all 37 items had ordered thresholds with good item fit to the Rasch model. Reliability was high, with person separation index and Cronbach alpha values, with and without extremes ≥ 0.86. As hypothesised, those participants who had a major difference in appearance, and those who reported liking their appearance less, scored lower on the appearance scales (p < 0.001). In the RMT analysis, the Eating/Drinking scale evidenced low reliability and poor targeting with close to 40% of particpants scoring at the ceiling. CONCLUSION: The FACE-Q Dental Module provides a means to collect evidence-based outcomes data from children and young adults who undergo orthodontic care for dental malocclusions.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity Dentistry And Oral EpidemiologySame topicOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsFrench-language works237,207