4.4 Article

Psychometric properties of the Thai version of the Scale of Oral Health Outcomes for 5-year-old children

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ipd.13026

关键词

child; dental caries; early childhood caries; Oral health; quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study translated the SOHO-5 into Thai and assessed its psychometric characteristics. The Th-SOHO-5 showed good reliability and validity, and can be used to evaluate the oral health-related quality of life of preschool children in Thailand.
Background As caries prevalence in Thai preschool children is very high and its consequences have scarcely been evaluated, the Scale of Oral Health Outcomes for 5-year-old children (SOHO-5) is considered as an appropriate tool to measure the children's oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). Aim To translate the SOHO-5 into Thai (Th-SOHO-5) and assess its psychometric characteristics. Design The cross-cultural adaptation of the SOHO-5 into Thai comprised forward-backward translation by experts and face validation by 20 child-parent dyads. To evaluate psychometric properties of the final version, a cross-sectional study was conducted on 306 child-parent pairs using an interview mode for children and a self-administered mode for parents. A trained investigator examined children's caries status. Results The Th-SOHO-5 showed satisfactory psychometric characteristics. Cronbach's alpha values were above 0.8 for both child and proxy reports. Overall intraclass correlation coefficients were > 0.9. Factor analysis supported a single-factor structure model of the Th-SOHO-5 and showed an excellent fit. Th-SOHO-5 scores were correlated with all global rating scales of oral health and well-being. Children with higher caries experience or caries with pulpal involvement demonstrated significantly higher Th-SOHO-5 scores. Conclusion The Th-SOHO-5 possessed good reliability and validity. It can be used to evaluate the OHRQoL of preschool children in Thailand.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据