Suppr超能文献

适用于也门青少年的牙科美学问卷阿拉伯语社会心理影响简版:横断面衍生与验证

Short Versions of the Arabic Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire for Yemeni Adolescents: Cross-Sectional Derivation and Validation.

作者信息

Alsanabani Amal A M, Yusof Zamros Yuzadi Mohd, Wan Hassan Wan Nurazreena, Aldhorae Khalid, Alyamani Helmi A

机构信息

Department of Community Oral Health and Clinical Prevention, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia.

Department of Preventive Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Sana'a University, Sana'a 2124, Yemen.

出版信息

Children (Basel). 2022 Mar 2;9(3):341. doi: 10.3390/children9030341.

Abstract

Objectives: To shorten the 24-item Arabic Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ(A)) for adolescents in Yemen. Material and methods: Two shortening methods derived six-item and nine-item versions: the item impact method selected items with the highest impact scores as rated by 30 participants in each subscale; and the regression method was applied using data of 385 participants from the PIDAQ(A) validity study, with the total PIDAQ(A) score as the dependent variable, and its individual items as the independent variables. The four derived versions were assessed for validity and reliability. Results: The means of the six-item and nine-item short versions of both methods were close. Cronbach’s alpha values extended from 0.90 to 0.92 (intra-class correlations = 0.85−0.88). In criterion validity, strong significant correlations were detected between scores of all short versions and the 24-item PIDAQ(A) score (0.96−0.98; p < 0.001). Construct validity displayed significant associations among all short versions and self-perceived dental appearance rank and self-perceived need for orthodontic braces rank (p < 0.05). Mean scores of all short versions were significantly different between adolescents with severe malocclusion and those with slight malocclusion in discriminant validity tests. In conclusion, all PIDAQ(A) short versions are valid and reliable.

摘要

目的

缩短适用于也门青少年的24项阿拉伯语牙科美学心理社会影响问卷(PIDAQ(A))。材料与方法:两种缩短方法得出了6项版和9项版:项目影响法选择了每个子量表中30名参与者评定的影响得分最高的项目;回归法则使用了来自PIDAQ(A)效度研究的385名参与者的数据,以PIDAQ(A)总分作为因变量,其各个项目作为自变量。对得出的四个版本进行效度和信度评估。结果:两种方法的6项和9项短版的均值相近。克朗巴哈系数值范围为0.90至0.92(组内相关系数 = 0.85−0.88)。在效标效度方面,所有短版得分与24项PIDAQ(A)得分之间均检测到强显著相关性(0.96−0.98;p < 0.001)。结构效度显示,所有短版与自我感知的牙齿外观排名以及自我感知的正畸矫治器需求排名之间均存在显著关联(p < 0.05)。在区分效度测试中,严重错颌青少年与轻度错颌青少年的所有短版平均得分存在显著差异。总之,所有PIDAQ(A)短版均有效且可靠。

相似文献

8
Does Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ) reflect the impact of malocclusion on facial aesthetics?
Dental Press J Orthod. 2023 Aug 25;28(4):e232211. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.28.4.e232211.oar. eCollection 2023.
9
Psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics in adolescence: validity and reliability of a questionnaire across age-groups.
Qual Life Res. 2015 Feb;24(2):379-90. doi: 10.1007/s11136-014-0767-8. Epub 2014 Aug 5.

本文引用的文献

2
Translation and validation of the Swedish version of the Psychosocial Impact of Dental Aesthetics Questionnaire (PIDAQ) for adolescents.
Acta Odontol Scand. 2021 May;79(4):241-247. doi: 10.1080/00016357.2020.1823014. Epub 2020 Oct 7.
3
Patient-based outcomes and quality of life.
Periodontol 2000. 2020 Jun;83(1):277-294. doi: 10.1111/prd.12305.
4
Validity and reliability of the Persian version of the psychosocial impact of dental aesthetics questionnaire.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019 Jul 18;17(1):126. doi: 10.1186/s12955-019-1188-8.
5
Does the number of response options matter? Psychometric perspectives using personality questionnaire data.
Psychol Assess. 2019 Apr;31(4):557-566. doi: 10.1037/pas0000648. Epub 2019 Mar 14.
6
Translation and validation of the Arabic version of the 5-item Oral health impact profile: OHIP5-Ar.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Nov 20;16(1):218. doi: 10.1186/s12955-018-1046-0.
7
What impact do questionnaire length and monetary incentives have on mailed health psychology survey response?
Br J Health Psychol. 2017 Nov;22(4):671-685. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12239. Epub 2017 Apr 19.
10
Maximising response from GPs to questionnaire surveys: do length or incentives make a difference?
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Jan 6;15:3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-15-3.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验