ArticleBMC oral health2025
Validation, measurement properties, and minimal clinically important difference of short-version oral health impact profile (OHIP-5) by type of prosthodontic treatment: a prospective cohort study.
Article in BMC oral health, 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.
- Validation and psychometric evaluation of the Albanian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile-5 (OHIP-5-ALB) in Kosovo.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Psychometric Properties of the Five-Item Ultrashort Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP5) in the Serbian Cultural Environment: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate measurement properties of the 5-item Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-5) in Thai version, specifically its validity and responsiveness, as well as to compared with the Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (OIDP) and 14-item OHIP (OHIP-14) among patients undergoing conventional prosthodontic treatments. Minimal clinically important difference (MID) values of the treatment were also determined.
methodsThis prospective cohort study was conducted in 133 prosthodontic patients, receiving complete dentures (CCD), removable partial dentures (RPD), or fixed dental prostheses (FDP). Tooth loss conditions were compared based on the number of functional teeth and posterior occluding pairs. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) outcomes were assessed at baseline (before prosthodontic treatment), and at 3 months and 6 months after treatment, using the OIDP, OHIP-14, and OHIP-5 questionnaires. Differences in OHRQoL scores across tooth loss conditions, and before and after treatment were compared using non-parametric analyses. Convergent validity was examined by Kendall's Tau-b correlation between OHIP-5, OHIP-14, and OIDP.
resultsSignificant differences in OIDP and OHIP scores across tooth loss conditions supported the known-groups validity. The OHIP-5 Thai showed strong correlations with OHIP-14 and OIDP, confirming convergent validity. OHRQoL scores decreased over 6 months after the treatment in all questionnaires, indicating good responsiveness. MID values of the treatment were higher for the CCD and RPD patients, while MID scores for the FDP patients were near zero when assessed using OHIP questionnaires.
conclusionThe Thai version of OHIP-5 is a valid and responsive instrument for evaluating outcomes of CCD and RPD treatments. However, due to near-zero MID values, it may be less suitable for assessing treatment changes following FDP treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The OHIP-5 Thai is a practical and efficient instrument for assessing OHRQoL problems and for evaluating patient outcomes following conventional prosthodontic treatments. Its performance is correlated with longer OHRQoL instruments, making it suitable for both clinical practice and research settings, supporting patient-centered, evidence-based prosthodontic care. The established MID scores offer valuable benchmarks for interpreting clinically meaningful changes. However, its use may be limited in patients with sufficient functional teeth receiving FDP, as it may be unable to capture meaningful changes.
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.