SynthesisCommunity dentistry and oral epidemiology2020
Development of patient-reported outcome measures of children's oral health aesthetics.
Synthesis in Community dentistry and oral epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing the engagement of children and families in selecting patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and developing their measures: a systematic review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2021Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of child- and parent-proxy measures of oral health aesthetics.
methodsItems that describe children's perceptions of their oral attractiveness and its impact on social, emotional, and behavioural functioning were developed based on a systematic review of existing measures, clinician feedback (n = 13) and child semi-structured interviews (n = 27). The tools' content validity was assessed in cognitive interviews with 21 children. Items were administered to socio-demographically diverse samples of 998 children aged 8-17 years and 626 parents of children aged 5-17 years. Psychometric methods were used to finalize and calibrate item banks, generate short questionnaire forms, and evaluate the tools' reliability, precision and validity.
resultsThe item banks and their short forms provide precise measurement across a wide range of oral health aesthetic states. They measure relevant and meaningful positive and negative experiences using terminology that most children as young as 8 years of age can understand. Known-group comparisons and convergence with existing measures of oral health-related quality of life, global health and body image provide evidence of construct validity. The scores are interpretable relative to the US general population.
conclusionsThe oral health aesthetic item banks and short forms provide precise and valid assessments of children's satisfaction with their oral appearance. They may be useful for targeting and evaluating paediatric dental and orthodontic care in clinical practice and research settings.
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.