ArticleHeliyon2024
Validation of the "obturator functioning scale" for Chinese-speaking patients with obturator prostheses after cancer-related maxillectomy.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Obturator Functioning Scale (OFS) is a scale without formal measures of validity in any language. This study aimed to translate and adapt the OFS from English to Chinese and check its reliability and validity in Chinese-speaking patients with obturator prostheses after cancer-related maxillectomy. Methods: The 15-item Chinese preversion of the OFS was completed by 133 patients in three tertiary stomatological hospitals. Of these, 41 completed it again one week after the first measurement. The patients also completed the Chinese version of the University of Washington quality of life scale (UW-QOL, Version 4). Results: Item 12 ("upper lip feels numb") was deleted to achieve a better statistical fit. The 14-item Chinese version of the OFS (OFS-Ch) demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.908). The test-retest reliability coefficients for most items exceeded 0.90, indicating substantial reproducibility. Confirmatory factor analysis found that the scale consisted of three correlated factors: 1) eating (four items), 2) speech (five items), and 3) other problems (five items). This explained 70.2 % of the total variance using exploratory factor analysis. The scale was significantly convergent and discriminant and could validly discriminate between patients with Brown I and IId maxillary defects. Conclusions: Our results showed that the OFS-Ch scale is a valid tool for evaluating oral dysfunction and satisfaction with appearance for patients with the obturator prosthesis and identifying those at risk of poor obturator function in clinical 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.