78
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessment of the quality of measures of child oral health-related quality of life

      research-article
      1 , , 1 , 1 , 1
      BMC Oral Health
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Several measures of oral health-related quality of life have been developed for children. The most frequently used are the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ), the Child Oral Impacts on Daily Performances (C-OIDP) and the Child Oral Health Impact Profile (COHIP). The aim of this study was to assess the methodological quality of the development and testing of these three measures.

          Methods

          A systematic search strategy was used to identify eligible studies published up to December 2012, using both MEDLINE and Web of Science. Titles and abstracts were read independently by two investigators and full papers retrieved where the inclusion criteria were met. Data were extracted by two teams of two investigators using a piloted protocol. The data were used to describe the development of the measures and their use against existing criteria. The methodological quality and measurement properties of the measures were assessed using standards proposed by the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group.

          Results

          The search strategy yielded 653 papers, of which 417 were duplicates. Following analysis of the abstracts, 119 papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of papers reported cross-sectional studies (n = 117) with three of longitudinal design. Fifteen studies which had used the original version of the measures in their original language were included in the COSMIN analysis. The most frequently used measure was the CPQ. Reliability and construct validity appear to be adequate for all three measures. Children were not fully involved in item generation which may compromise their content validity. Internal consistency was measured using classic test theory with no evidence of modern psychometric techniques being used to test unidimensionality of the measures included in the COSMIN analysis.

          Conclusion

          The three measures evaluated appear to be able to discriminate between groups. CPQ has been most widely tested and several versions are available. COHIP employed a rigorous development strategy but has been tested in fewer populations. C-OIDP is shorter and has been used successfully in epidemiological studies. Further testing using modern psychometric techniques such as item response theory is recommended. Future developments should also focus on the development of measures which can evaluate longitudinal change.

          Related collections

          Most cited references131

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine.

          The dominant model of disease today is biomedical, and it leaves no room within tis framework for the social, psychological, and behavioral dimensions of illness. A biopsychosocial model is proposed that provides a blueprint for research, a framework for teaching, and a design for action in the real world of health care.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            What do measures of 'oral health-related quality of life' measure?

            The terms 'health-related quality of life' and 'quality of life' are now in common use to describe the outcomes of oral health conditions and therapy for those conditions. In addition, there has been a proliferation of measures designed to quantify those outcomes. These measures, which were initially designated as socio-dental indicators or subjective oral health indicators are now more usually referred to as measures of oral health-related quality of life (OH-QoL). This is based on the assumption that the functional and psychosocial impacts they document must, of necessity, affect the quality of life. While this assumption has been subject to critical scrutiny in medicine, this is not the case with dentistry. Consequently, exactly what is being measured by indexes of OH-QoL is somewhat unclear. Based on the debate between Gill and Feinstein and Guyatt and Cook, we outline a number of criteria by means of which the construct addressed by measures of OH-QoL may be assessed. These are concerned with how the measures were developed and validated. These criteria are then used to appraise five of the many measures that have been developed over the past 20 years--the GOHAI, OHIP, OIDP, COHQoL and OH-QoL. The main conclusion is that while all document the frequency of the functional and psychosocial impacts that emanate from oral disorders they do not unequivocally establish the meaning and significance of those impacts. Consequently, the claim that oral disorders affect the quality of life has yet to be clearly demonstrated. Verifying this claim requires further qualitative studies of the outcomes of oral disorders as perceived by patients and persons, and the concurrent use of measures that more explicitly address the issue of quality of life.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validity and reliability of a questionnaire for measuring child oral-health-related quality of life.

              Oral-health-related quality of life measures that exist are designed for adults. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the CPQ(11-14), a self-report measure of the impact of oral and oro-facial conditions on 11- to 14-year-old children. An item pool was generated with the use of a literature review and interviews with health professionals, parents, and child patients. The 36 items rated the most frequent and bothersome by 83 children were selected for the CPQ(11-14). Validity testing involved a new sample of 123 children. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a subgroup of these children (n = 65). Mean CPQ(11-14) scores were highest for oro-facial (31.4), lower for orthodontic (24.3), and lowest for pedodontic (23.3) patients. There were significant associations between the CPQ(11-14) score and global ratings of oral health (p < 0.05) and overall well-being (p < 0.01). The Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient for the CPQ(11-14) were 0.91 and 0.90, respectively. These results suggest that the CPQ(11-14) is valid and reliable.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                BMC Oral Health
                BMC Oral Health
                BMC Oral Health
                BioMed Central
                1472-6831
                2014
                23 April 2014
                : 14
                : 40
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Unit of Oral Health and Development, School of Clinical Dentistry, Sheffield S10 2TA, UK
                Article
                1472-6831-14-40
                10.1186/1472-6831-14-40
                4021173
                24758535
                a87ec0bf-1027-4d4e-839d-db095dca49b9
                Copyright © 2014 Gilchrist et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 27 January 2014
                : 3 April 2014
                Categories
                Research Article

                Dentistry
                Dentistry

                Comments

                Comment on this article