ArticleBrazilian oral research2024
Validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised for Dental.
Article in Brazilian oral research, 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.
- Short-Forms of the Brazilian Children's Experiences of Dental Anxiety Measure (CEDAM): Development and Initial Evaluation.International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to test the validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the "Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised for Dental" (IPQ-RD) in parents/guardians of children aged six to 14 years. The sample consisted of 63 parents/guardians of schoolchildren from the municipal school system of Teófilo Otoni, MG. Remote and virtual data collection consisted of self-completion of personal data, socioeconomic questionnaire and the Brazilian short versions of the "Parental-Caregiver Perceptions Questionnaire" (16-P-CPQ) and the "Family Impact Scale" (4-FIS). The IPQ-RD was applied by telephone interview. Almost half of the sample belonged to socioeconomic classes C1 and C2. Approximately 1/3 classified their child's oral health as "regular" or "poor", while 11.1% reported "strong" or "very strong" impact on their child's well-being. The items most frequently cited as having an impact on the four domains of the 16-P-CPQ were: "bad breath" (23.8%), "mouth breathing" (20.7%), "feeling anxious or afraid" (20.7%), and "paying attention at school" (10%). In the 4-FIS, 11.1% "had little time for themselves or the family". There were higher IPQ-RD scores in the "disease coherence" domain for women and lower values of "emotional dimensions" for parents/guardians with incomplete education. The mean IPQ-RD score was 126.4 (±15.1), and domain scores were positively correlated. The internal consistency was "almost perfect" for the IPQ-RD total score, ranging from "moderate" to "almost perfect" for the "child-control" and "child-consequences" domains. The intraclass correlation coefficient ranged from 0.04 (poor) to 0.68 (substantial). The Brazilian Portuguese version of the IPQ-RD proved to be valid and reliable for assessing the cognitive and emotional perception of parents/guardians about childhood dental caries.
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.