ArticleActa odontologica Scandinavica2025
Dimensionality of the Fonseca Anamnestic Index and validation of its short-form derivative.
Article in Acta odontologica Scandinavica, 2025. 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.
- Validation of Two Diagnostic Tools for the Screening of Temporomandibular Disorder.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
objectivesRecently, the Short-Form Fonseca Anamnestic Index (SFAI) was shown to have high diagnostic accuracy when compared to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) in patient samples. This study investigated the dimensionality of the parent instrument (Fonseca Anamnestic Index [FAI]) and validated its main component using Rasch analysis in non-patient populations.
methodsFAI data from a total of 901 participants from Singapore and Indonesia with a mean age 19.30 ± 1.48 years (65.0% women) were examined. Of these, 53.8% were FAI positive and 46.2% were FAI negative. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was performed to extract the main component of the FAI using an eigenvalue > 1.0 and direct oblimin rotation with item loading of > 0.40. Rasch analysis was subsequently carried out on the items of the main component.
resultsThe FAI was found to be multidimensional with the main component involving items F1, F2, F3, F6, and F7 which were the items of the SFAI. The SFAI had moderate internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.63) and fitted the Rasch model with person and item infit/outfit mean square (MnSq) values of 0.98/0.96 and 1.00/0.96 logits respectively. The infit/outfit MnSq of the SFAI items ranged from 0.82 to 1.06 logits with Item F2 (side-movement difficulty) being the most difficult and item F3 (muscle pain) the easiest.
conclusionsThe FAI is multidimensional with the main component comprising the five items of the SFAI that fitted the Rasch model. With its good Rasch validity, separation, and reliability, the SFAI is a promising tool for TMD screening.
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.