ArticleJDR clinical and translational research2020
Quality Appraisal of Child Oral Health-Related Quality of Life Measures: A Scoping Review.
Article in JDR clinical and translational research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Does the early loss of primary teeth impact the oral health-related quality of life of children? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluation of quality of life with the Parental-Caregiver Perceptions Questionnaire (P-CPQ) in children requiring general anesthesia for dental treatment.European oral research · 2025Article
- Extraction of First Permanent Molars in Children-A Comprehensive Review of History, Aim, Space Closure and Other Consequences.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Synergy of Regenerative Periodontal Surgery and Orthodontics Improves Quality of Life of Patients with Stage IV Periodontitis: 24-Month Outcomes of a Multicenter RCT.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Quantitative data collection approaches in subject-reported oral health research: a scoping review.BMC oral health · 2022Article
- The MOHIP-14Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pediatric patients' reasons for visiting dentists in all WHO regions.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChildren's oral health-related quality of life (COHQoL) measures are well known and widely used. However, rigorous systematic reviews of these measures and analyses of their quality are in absence.
objectivesTo systematically review and quantitatively assess the quality of COHQoL measures through a scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Systematic literature search of PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), HaPI (Health and Psychosocial Instruments), and DOSS (Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source). STUDY ELIGIBILITY: The measure's focus was COHQoL; the child age ranged from 5 to 14 years; the publication was either a research article or a systematic review and related to caries; and it was written in English or had an English abstract. Two authors independently selected the studies. Disagreements were reconciled by group discussions with a third author. APPRAISAL: The International Society for Quality of Life Research minimum standards for patient-reported outcome measures were used for quality appraisal. SYNTHESIS: Descriptive analysis.
resultsWe identified 18 measures. Their quality scores ranged from 9.5 to 15.0 on a scale of 16. The quality appeared to bear no relationship to the citation and use of these measures. However, elements of these measures might be more useful than others, depending on the age-specific use and primary quality concerns. LIMITATIONS: Some of the information on the minimum standards of the 18 measures cannot be found in the existing literature. Measures published without English abstract were not searched.
conclusionsThe quality of these measures is suboptimal. Researchers and practitioners in this field should exercise caution when choosing and using these measures. Efforts at improving the quality of the COHQoL measures, such as refining existing ones or developing new measures, are warranted. KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT: Researchers, clinician scientists, and clinicians can use the results of this study when deciding which oral health-related quality of life measure they wish to use in children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.