MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412041178 · doi:10.1016/j.identj.2025.100865

Arabic Translation and Validation of the Adult Oral Health Standard Set Questionnaire

2025· article· en· W4412041178 on OpenAlexaff
Shiraz Altigani, Lamyia Anweigi, Randa Abidia, Manar E. Abdel‐Rahman, Rula Shami, Abeer Tamer, Nader Hamdan, Rayyan Khalid, Reema A Alabdulqader, Alghalia Al-Mansoori, Iheb Ben Naceur, Al-Maha Fakhroo, Shahd Al-Najdi, Faleh Tamimi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Dental Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistry of Public HealthQatar University
KeywordsArabicTranslation (biology)Traditional medicineMedicineSet (abstract data type)DentistryComputer scienceFamily medicineChemistryLinguisticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Adult Oral Health Standard Set (AOHSS) questionnaire was developed by the International Dental Federation (FDI) and the Oral Adult Health Working Group (OHWG) for oral health assessment in clinical settings, research and population health surveillance. The AOHSS comprises clinical-reported outcome measures (CROMs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including demographics, oral health and oral function, record of pain, oral hygiene practices and treatment cost. This survey was developed in the English language; it has been tested in European populations and translated to other languages such as French. However, an Arabic translation would be needed to apply it for clinical and population-based research on oral health in the Arab world. This study aimed to translate and validate the PROMs section of the AOHSS questionnaire into Arabic. METHODS: The AOHSS questionnaire was translated into Arabic according to the guidelines of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcome Research (ISPOR), through a process that included forward translation, backward translation, expert committee consensus and cognitive debriefing. The questionnaire's test-retest reliability was assessed using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) at a 2-week interval on a convenience sample of 30 subjects. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach alpha. Construct validity of the final Arabic version was examined against the validated Arabic Oral Health Assessment WHO questionnaire on 100 participants from different Arab nationalities. The participants completed both questionnaires, and the results were compared using Spearman's rho correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability assessment for the Arabic version of the AOHSS presented an average ICC of 0.83 (95% CI of 0.68-0.92), indicating excellent agreement. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.75, indicating satisfactory internal consistency. For construct validity, Spearman's rho correlation coefficient ranged from 0.14 to 0.90, indicating a statistically significant correlation with the WHO questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: The Arabic version of the AOHSS is good for reliability, internal consistency and validity.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Dental JournalSame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207