ArticleAustralian journal of psychology2026
Development and psychometric validation of the Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire for Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults.
Article in Australian journal of psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a culturally adapted Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ) for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. Method: The short-form PIDAQ was culturally adapted and administered to 187 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. Network psychometric analyses examined dimensionality, item redundancy, network loadings, and model fit. Additionally, internal consistency (McDonald's Ω), construct validity, and criterion validity were also measured. Results: Two statistically redundant but conceptually distinct item pairs (Look/Nice and Proud/Show) were retained on cultural and content-validity grounds. The "Worry" item was removed for a low network loading (0.169), yielding a final seven-item PIDAQ. Model fit was good (χ2(4) = 6.26, p < 0.180; CFI = 1.000; RMSEA = 0.059, 90% CI: 0.000-0.140). Internal consistency was excellent (Ω=0.94), inter-item correlations were moderate to adequate (ρ= 0.520-0.790), and the correlation with the SEWB scale provided directionally consistent support for criterion validity (ρ=0.320). Participants reported mixed feelings about dental aesthetics, often not minding showing their teeth in photographs yet being dissatisfied with how their teeth look. Conclusions: The PIDAQ demonstrated strong psychometric properties, making it a valid, reliable tool for assessing the psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics.
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.