在临床和普通人群中验证匈牙利版口腔健康综合评估指数 (GOHAI)。

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE BMC Oral Health Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1186/s12903-024-05198-2
Judit Oszlánszky, Károly Mensch, Péter Hermann, Zsombor Zrubka
{"title":"在临床和普通人群中验证匈牙利版口腔健康综合评估指数 (GOHAI)。","authors":"Judit Oszlánszky, Károly Mensch, Péter Hermann, Zsombor Zrubka","doi":"10.1186/s12903-024-05198-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) provides a framework for selecting and validating patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This study aims to validate the Hungarian version of the GOHAI and, for the first time, to assess its Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Smallest Detectable Change (SDC), and Measurement Invariance (MI) across general and clinical populations as well as different age groups, following COSMIN guidelines.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The translation was performed using a forward-backward process. A mixed sample (n = 306) was recruited in Budapest from May 2023 to February 2024, consisting of the general population (45.1%), recruited from health kiosks and a nursing home, and the clinical population (54.9%), sourced from Semmelweis University's care units. The sample was further divided into two age groups: 18-64 years old (54.9%) and 65 + years old (45.1%). GOHAI was administered twice to 108 stable participants. For both the additive score (ADD-GOHAI) and simple count (SC-GOHAI), structural validity and measurement invariance by subgroups were assessed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). SEM was calculated using the SEM agreement formula, and SDC using: [Formula: see text]. Convergent and known-group validity were tested against predefined hypotheses for structural validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Contrary to a three factor model, a single-factor model showed good fit in all subgroups for both scoring methods, with adequate internal consistency (Cronbach 𝛼: 0.76-0.85). Four of the six hypotheses for convergent validity and all ten hypotheses for known-groups validity supported the predefined criteria. Measurement invariance between clinical and general populations, or by age, was not demonstrated, so GOHAI's different measurement properties should be considered when comparing subpopulations. Test-retest reliability was adequate (ICC: 0.87-0.96). SDC was ≈5 points using ADD-GOHAI and 2-3 points using SC-GOHAI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Hungarian version of GOHAI demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties across both general and clinical populations, as well as among both younger and older age groups. While the measurement properties of SC-GOHAI may be more stable between populations, ADD-GOHAI seems more suitable for individual follow-up. However, observed changes must be considered in relation to the measurement error associated with GOHAI.</p>","PeriodicalId":9072,"journal":{"name":"BMC Oral Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"1402"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of the Hungarian version of the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) in clinical and general populations.\",\"authors\":\"Judit Oszlánszky, Károly Mensch, Péter Hermann, Zsombor Zrubka\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12903-024-05198-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) provides a framework for selecting and validating patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This study aims to validate the Hungarian version of the GOHAI and, for the first time, to assess its Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Smallest Detectable Change (SDC), and Measurement Invariance (MI) across general and clinical populations as well as different age groups, following COSMIN guidelines.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The translation was performed using a forward-backward process. A mixed sample (n = 306) was recruited in Budapest from May 2023 to February 2024, consisting of the general population (45.1%), recruited from health kiosks and a nursing home, and the clinical population (54.9%), sourced from Semmelweis University's care units. The sample was further divided into two age groups: 18-64 years old (54.9%) and 65 + years old (45.1%). GOHAI was administered twice to 108 stable participants. For both the additive score (ADD-GOHAI) and simple count (SC-GOHAI), structural validity and measurement invariance by subgroups were assessed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). SEM was calculated using the SEM agreement formula, and SDC using: [Formula: see text]. Convergent and known-group validity were tested against predefined hypotheses for structural validity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Contrary to a three factor model, a single-factor model showed good fit in all subgroups for both scoring methods, with adequate internal consistency (Cronbach 𝛼: 0.76-0.85). Four of the six hypotheses for convergent validity and all ten hypotheses for known-groups validity supported the predefined criteria. Measurement invariance between clinical and general populations, or by age, was not demonstrated, so GOHAI's different measurement properties should be considered when comparing subpopulations. Test-retest reliability was adequate (ICC: 0.87-0.96). SDC was ≈5 points using ADD-GOHAI and 2-3 points using SC-GOHAI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The Hungarian version of GOHAI demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties across both general and clinical populations, as well as among both younger and older age groups. While the measurement properties of SC-GOHAI may be more stable between populations, ADD-GOHAI seems more suitable for individual follow-up. However, observed changes must be considered in relation to the measurement error associated with GOHAI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Oral Health\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"1402\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Oral Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-05198-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Oral Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-05198-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:COSMIN(基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准)为选择和验证患者报告结果测量工具(PROMs)提供了一个框架。本研究旨在验证匈牙利版 GOHAI,并根据 COSMIN 指南,首次评估其在普通人群、临床人群以及不同年龄段人群中的测量标准误差(SEM)、最小可检测变化(SDC)和测量不变性(MI):采用前向-后向过程进行翻译。2023 年 5 月至 2024 年 2 月期间,在布达佩斯招募了一个混合样本(n = 306),其中包括从健康信息亭和一家疗养院招募的普通人群(45.1%),以及从塞梅尔维斯大学护理单位招募的临床人群(54.9%)。样本进一步分为两个年龄组:18-64 岁(54.9%)和 65 岁以上(45.1%)。对 108 名稳定的参与者进行了两次 GOHAI 测试。对于加法得分(ADD-GOHAI)和简单计数(SC-GOHAI),通过确认性因子分析(CFA)评估了结构效度和分组测量不变性。内部一致性采用 Cronbach's alpha 进行评估,测试-再测可靠性采用类内相关系数 (ICC) 进行测量。SEM 采用 SEM 一致公式计算,SDC 采用[公式:见正文]:[公式:见正文]。根据预先设定的结构效度假设,对收敛效度和已知组效度进行了测试:与三因素模型相反,单因素模型在所有分组的两种评分方法中都显示出良好的拟合性,并具有足够的内部一致性(Cronbach 𝛼:0.76-0.85)。聚合效度的六项假设中的四项和已知组效度的十项假设均符合预定标准。临床人群和普通人群之间或不同年龄段之间的测量不变量没有得到证实,因此在对亚人群进行比较时,应考虑到 GOHAI 不同的测量特性。测试-再测可靠性良好(ICC:0.87-0.96)。使用 ADD-GOHAI 时,SDC ≈5分;使用 SC-GOHAI 时,SDC ≈2-3分:匈牙利版 GOHAI 在普通人群和临床人群中,以及在年轻群体和老年群体中都表现出令人满意的心理测量特性。虽然SC-GOHAI的测量特性在不同人群中可能更稳定,但ADD-GOHAI似乎更适合个人随访。不过,观察到的变化必须考虑到与 GOHAI 相关的测量误差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Validation of the Hungarian version of the General Oral Health Assessment Index (GOHAI) in clinical and general populations.

Background: COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) provides a framework for selecting and validating patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs). This study aims to validate the Hungarian version of the GOHAI and, for the first time, to assess its Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Smallest Detectable Change (SDC), and Measurement Invariance (MI) across general and clinical populations as well as different age groups, following COSMIN guidelines.

Materials and methods: The translation was performed using a forward-backward process. A mixed sample (n = 306) was recruited in Budapest from May 2023 to February 2024, consisting of the general population (45.1%), recruited from health kiosks and a nursing home, and the clinical population (54.9%), sourced from Semmelweis University's care units. The sample was further divided into two age groups: 18-64 years old (54.9%) and 65 + years old (45.1%). GOHAI was administered twice to 108 stable participants. For both the additive score (ADD-GOHAI) and simple count (SC-GOHAI), structural validity and measurement invariance by subgroups were assessed via Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability was measured using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). SEM was calculated using the SEM agreement formula, and SDC using: [Formula: see text]. Convergent and known-group validity were tested against predefined hypotheses for structural validity.

Results: Contrary to a three factor model, a single-factor model showed good fit in all subgroups for both scoring methods, with adequate internal consistency (Cronbach 𝛼: 0.76-0.85). Four of the six hypotheses for convergent validity and all ten hypotheses for known-groups validity supported the predefined criteria. Measurement invariance between clinical and general populations, or by age, was not demonstrated, so GOHAI's different measurement properties should be considered when comparing subpopulations. Test-retest reliability was adequate (ICC: 0.87-0.96). SDC was ≈5 points using ADD-GOHAI and 2-3 points using SC-GOHAI.

Conclusion: The Hungarian version of GOHAI demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties across both general and clinical populations, as well as among both younger and older age groups. While the measurement properties of SC-GOHAI may be more stable between populations, ADD-GOHAI seems more suitable for individual follow-up. However, observed changes must be considered in relation to the measurement error associated with GOHAI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Oral Health
BMC Oral Health DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
6.90%
发文量
481
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Oral Health is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of disorders of the mouth, teeth and gums, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of pain intensity and airway changes in non-growing patients treated by MARPE with and without micro-osteoperforation: a randomized clinical trial. Automated pipeline for linear and volumetric assessment of facial swelling after third molar surgery. Comparative evaluation of desensitizing agents on shear bond strength of zirconia to dentin. Comparison of electronic apex locator and simultaneous working length detection methods with radiological method in terms of postoperative pain. Effect of Zinc on improving silver diamine fluoride-derived tooth discoloration in vitro.
×
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