Assessing the evaluative properties of the Child Oral Health Quality of Life Questionnaire (COHQoL) in the context of orthodontic treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To establish its evaluative properties, patients from the Graduate Orthodontic Clinic, University of Toronto and their parents, were selected to complete the Child Oral Health Questionnaire---an oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) measure---both before commencement and after completion of the child's orthodontic treatment. The initial malocclusion and final orthodontic result were assessed using two occlusal indices (PAR and DAI) to determine normative orthodontic need. Statistical analyses were conducted to establish significant correlations and to evaluate the questionnaire's properties. It was concluded that although the overall sample size was small, the questionnaires showed evidence of longitudinal construct validity and responsiveness, and an ability to detect a positive change from pre- to post-orthodontic treatment. There also seemed to be a positive correlation between normative orthodontic need and impact on OHRQoL, although not statistically significant. No relationship, however, was found between treatment of malocclusion and change in OHRQoL in this sample.
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 | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".