ArticlePeerJ2024
Validity and reliability of a teledentistry survey among dental practitioners in Saudi Arabia.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The perception of teledentistry use among dental practitioners in various contexts was assessed using the Teledentistry Survey (the TDS-24). However, this survey's psychometric analyses have not yet been analysed. This present study aims to examine the validity and reliability of the TDS-24 in a sample of dental practitioners in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A self-administered questionnaire, including sociodemographic characteristics and the TDS, was distributed as a cross-sectional survey to 800 current dental practitioners in Saudi Arabia recruited Results: The EFA of the survey yielded 20 items supporting a four-factor structure as follows: factor I (10 items), factor II (four items), factor III (three items) and factor IV (three items). The overall Cronbach's alpha was 0.85, while it was 0.86 for the first factor, 0.70 for the second factor, 0.52 for the third factor and 0.57 for the fourth factor. Conclusions: The TDS-20, after excluding four items, revealed four factors with adequate psychometric properties, making it a valid and reliable tool in assessing teledentistry perceptions among dental practitioners in this study sample.
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.