Validating evidence for the knowledge, management and involvement of dentists in a dental approach to sickle-cell disease.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Brazilian oral research Pub Date : 2024-04-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0026
Lucia Helena da Silva Ferreira Ancillotti, Mauro Henrique Nogueira Guimarães de Abreu, Angélica Maria Cupertino Lopes Marinho, Marcia Pereira Alves Dos Santos
{"title":"Validating evidence for the knowledge, management and involvement of dentists in a dental approach to sickle-cell disease.","authors":"Lucia Helena da Silva Ferreira Ancillotti, Mauro Henrique Nogueira Guimarães de Abreu, Angélica Maria Cupertino Lopes Marinho, Marcia Pereira Alves Dos Santos","doi":"10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study validated the content of an instrument designed to assess the knowledge, involvement (attitudes) and management (practice) of dentists relative to sickle-cell disease (KAPD-SCD). The instrument consisted of five domains composed of a total of thirteen items: I. Dentist's self-assessment relative to sickle-cell disease; II. Dentist's knowledge of the repercussions of sickle-cell disease on the stomatognathic system; III. Dentist's knowledge of the complications of sickle-cell disease in the stomatognathic system; IV. Dentist's knowledge concerning the dental management of sickle-cell disease patients; and V. Dentist's involvement in an approach to sickle-cell disease. Twelve experts assigned scores to each item of the instrument. The criteria were clarity, understanding and appropriateness, leaving open fields for comments. Descriptive and content analyses of the data were made. Each expert analyzed 39 assessment units. The percentages considered for agreement were high (>80%), medium (70%-80%), or low (<70%), and each item was maintained or revised according to the percentage observed. There was high consensus in 74% of the assessment units (the corresponding items were maintained), medium consensus in 24% of them (the corresponding items were revised), and disagreement in 2% of them, namely as regards the \"appropriateness\" of item 5 (\"Are there oral complications in sickle-cell disease?\"), which was revised. The final version of the instrument had 16 items for different applications such as in the clinical care program, teaching program, or research program, with different cut-off scores for each application. In conclusion, the level of agreement among experts showed evidence of the content validity of the instrument.</p>","PeriodicalId":9240,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian oral research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11376614/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian oral research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2024.vol38.0026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study validated the content of an instrument designed to assess the knowledge, involvement (attitudes) and management (practice) of dentists relative to sickle-cell disease (KAPD-SCD). The instrument consisted of five domains composed of a total of thirteen items: I. Dentist's self-assessment relative to sickle-cell disease; II. Dentist's knowledge of the repercussions of sickle-cell disease on the stomatognathic system; III. Dentist's knowledge of the complications of sickle-cell disease in the stomatognathic system; IV. Dentist's knowledge concerning the dental management of sickle-cell disease patients; and V. Dentist's involvement in an approach to sickle-cell disease. Twelve experts assigned scores to each item of the instrument. The criteria were clarity, understanding and appropriateness, leaving open fields for comments. Descriptive and content analyses of the data were made. Each expert analyzed 39 assessment units. The percentages considered for agreement were high (>80%), medium (70%-80%), or low (<70%), and each item was maintained or revised according to the percentage observed. There was high consensus in 74% of the assessment units (the corresponding items were maintained), medium consensus in 24% of them (the corresponding items were revised), and disagreement in 2% of them, namely as regards the "appropriateness" of item 5 ("Are there oral complications in sickle-cell disease?"), which was revised. The final version of the instrument had 16 items for different applications such as in the clinical care program, teaching program, or research program, with different cut-off scores for each application. In conclusion, the level of agreement among experts showed evidence of the content validity of the instrument.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
验证牙医对镰状细胞病的认识、管理和参与的证据。
本研究验证了旨在评估牙医对镰状细胞病的了解、参与(态度)和管理(实践)的工具(KAPD-SCD)的内容。该工具由五个领域共十三个项目组成:I. 牙医对镰状细胞病的自我评估;II.牙医对镰状细胞病对口腔系统影响的了解;III.牙科医生对镰状细胞病在口颌系统的并发症的了解; IV.牙科医生对镰状细胞病患者牙科治疗的了解;以及 V. 牙科医生参与镰状细胞病治疗的情况。12 位专家为该工具的每个项目打分。评分标准为清晰度、理解度和适当性,并留出了评论空间。对数据进行了描述性分析和内容分析。每位专家分析了 39 个评估单元。一致性的百分比分为高(>80%)、中(70%-80%)或低(>80%)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.00%
发文量
107
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Brazilian Oral Pathology and Oral Medicine: current state of the study of rare diseases. A novel low shrinkage dimethacrylate monomer as an alternative to BisGMA for adhesive and resin-based composite applications. A YOLO-V5 approach for the evaluation of normal fillings and overhanging fillings: an artificial intelligence study. Cross-cultural adaptation of the eHealth Literacy Scale for Brazilian adolescents. Influence of the digital file format on radiographic diagnostic in dentistry: a scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1