ArticleBMC oral health2025
Linguistic-cultural validation of a French version of the oral health assessment tool.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Correction: Linguistic-cultural validation of a French version of the oral health assessment tool.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study is to conduct a linguistic-cultural validation for the French context, of the original Australian version of the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) scale.
methodsThe study design is a mixed retrospective-prospective psychometric and linguistic translation/validation/study of the Oral Health Assessment Tool. This validation involved two samples: a retrospective convenience sample of 1319 patients from the "Geriatric Frailty Clinic (GFC) for Assessment of Frailty and Prevention of Disability" and a prospective sample included 50 patients (34 from the long-term care unit and 16 from the neuro-locomotive follow-up care and rehabilitation unit).
resultsThe face validity showed a clarity score for each item higher than 80%. The content validity was confirmed by a content validity index for items (I-CVI) score equal to or greater than 0.8 for each item and a content validity index for scales (S-CVI) of 0.91 for the entire tool. Internal consistency was considered good in the retrospective sample (Cronbach's alpha value of 0.73) and excellent in the prospective sample (Cronbach's alphas were 0.90 for each examiner). Inter-rater reliability was excellent for the total OHAT score (ICC = 0.98, 95% CI (0.97-0.99) at T0, and ICC = 0.99, 95% CI (0.99-1) at T1) and showed strong to almost perfect agreement (κ-values for single items varying from a minimum of 0.85 to 1) by items. Intra-rater reliabilities were considered substantial to excellent by items.
conclusionsThe French version of the OHAT is a reliable and valid tool for assessing the oral health of older people even with cognitive disorders.
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.