ArticleJournal of applied clinical medical physics2025
Development and validation of a questionnaire on radiation protection knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Moroccan dentists.
Article in Journal of applied clinical medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Content validation of a structured questionnaire to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of respiratory therapists regarding education for COPD self-management.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a questionnaire on radiation protection knowledge, attitudes, and practices among Moroccan dentists.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 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
purposeThis study aimed to develop and evaluate the validity and reliability of dentists' radiation protection knowledge, attitudes, and practices (DRP-KAPs) questionnaire.
methodsThis study was conducted using a stepwise approach. In the first step, items were generated to determine the relevant content and domains after a thorough literature review. In the second step, the content validity of the questionnaire was assessed by seven experts using face and content validity. The content validity index for relevance and clarity (I-CVI, S-CVI/Av, and S-CVI/UA) and the content validity ratio (CVR) were performed. Then, the questionnaire was pre-tested with 10 dentists for face validation. In the third step, reliability was assessed using internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson-20 (KR-20) and Cronbach's alpha) and test-retest (Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) methods by filling out the questionnaire by 100 dentists practicing in the Rabat-Salé-Kénitra region, in Morocco.
resultsThe finalized DRP-KAPs questionnaire contains 41 items covering knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAPs). The I-CVIs, S-CVI/UA and S-CVI/AV and CVR values of the 41 items were ≥0.86 for each item, ≥0.82, ≥0.97, and ≥0.71, respectively. With regard to internal consistency reliability, the KR-20 coefficients for the knowledge and practice domains were 0.70 and 0.68, respectively, and the Cronbach alpha for the attitude domain was 0.73. The DRP-KAPs questionnaire has good reliability with the ICC coefficients for attitude items ranging from 0.57 to 0.95 and Kappa coefficients for knowledge and practice items ranging from 0.64 to 1 and 0.77 to 1, respectively.
conclusionThe developed DRP-KAPs questionnaire was found to be a noteworthy tool for assessing radiation protection among dentists, with acceptable internal consistency, good ICC and Kappa coefficients, and good content validity indices.
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.