Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly
Identifieur interne : 002499 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 002498; suivant : 002500Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly
Auteurs : David Locker ; David Matear ; Marlene Stephens ; Herenia Lawrence ; Barbara PayneSource :
- Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology [ 0301-5661 ] ; 2001-10.
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
- Allen locker, Baycrest centre, Behavioural, Behavioural impacts, Behavioural outcomes, Centre, Chapel hill, Chronic care hospital, Clinical trial, Clinical trials, Community dent, Concurrent validity, Content validity, Daily life, Dent, Dent educ, Dental care facility, Dental charts, Dental ecology, Dental status, Dentate, Dentate participants, Denture, Elderly people, Elderly population, Functional limitations, Further work, General health, Geriatric care, Gohai, Gohai score, Gohai scores, Greater weight, Health assessment index, Health domains, High prevalence, High rates, Higher scores, Independent variables, Indicator foods, Item content, Jacobs dessens, Life measures, Life outcomes, Life satisfaction, Life stress, Meaningful change, Median values, Medical conditions, More dentures, Odds ratios, Ohrqol, Older adult populations, Older adults, Oral conditions, Oral disorders, Oral health, Oral health impact, Oral health impact community dent health, Oral health status, Oral health surveys, Oral quality, Partial denture, Participant, Patient populations, Personal interview, Physical disability, Psychological outcomes, Psychosocial impacts, Rank correlations, Response codes, Response format, Short form, Similar measures, Simple count, Simple count methods, Single item, Stress questionnaire, Target population, Tooth loss, Usual jobs.
- Teeft :
- Allen locker, Baycrest centre, Behavioural, Behavioural impacts, Behavioural outcomes, Centre, Chapel hill, Chronic care hospital, Clinical trial, Clinical trials, Community dent, Concurrent validity, Content validity, Daily life, Dent, Dent educ, Dental care facility, Dental charts, Dental ecology, Dental status, Dentate, Dentate participants, Denture, Elderly people, Elderly population, Functional limitations, Further work, General health, Geriatric care, Gohai, Gohai score, Gohai scores, Greater weight, Health assessment index, Health domains, High prevalence, High rates, Higher scores, Independent variables, Indicator foods, Item content, Jacobs dessens, Life measures, Life outcomes, Life satisfaction, Life stress, Meaningful change, Median values, Medical conditions, More dentures, Odds ratios, Ohrqol, Older adult populations, Older adults, Oral conditions, Oral disorders, Oral health, Oral health impact, Oral health impact community dent health, Oral health status, Oral health surveys, Oral quality, Partial denture, Participant, Patient populations, Personal interview, Physical disability, Psychological outcomes, Psychosocial impacts, Rank correlations, Response codes, Response format, Short form, Similar measures, Simple count, Simple count methods, Single item, Stress questionnaire, Target population, Tooth loss, Usual jobs.
Abstract
Abstract – Objectives: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly. Methods: Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre. Results: The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5ELe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><author><name sortKey="Locker, David" sort="Locker, David" uniqKey="Locker D" first="David" last="Locker">David Locker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: david.locker@utoronto.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Matear, David" sort="Matear, David" uniqKey="Matear D" first="David" last="Matear">David Matear</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Stephens, Marlene" sort="Stephens, Marlene" uniqKey="Stephens M" first="Marlene" last="Stephens">Marlene Stephens</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lawrence, Herenia" sort="Lawrence, Herenia" uniqKey="Lawrence H" first="Herenia" last="Lawrence">Herenia Lawrence</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Payne, Barbara" sort="Payne, Barbara" uniqKey="Payne B" first="Barbara" last="Payne">Barbara Payne</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E</idno><date when="2001" year="2001">2001</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">002499</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">002499</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><author><name sortKey="Locker, David" sort="Locker, David" uniqKey="Locker D" first="David" last="Locker">David Locker</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: david.locker@utoronto.ca</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Matear, David" sort="Matear, David" uniqKey="Matear D" first="David" last="Matear">David Matear</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Stephens, Marlene" sort="Stephens, Marlene" uniqKey="Stephens M" first="Marlene" last="Stephens">Marlene Stephens</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Lawrence, Herenia" sort="Lawrence, Herenia" uniqKey="Lawrence H" first="Herenia" last="Lawrence">Herenia Lawrence</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Payne, Barbara" sort="Payne, Barbara" uniqKey="Payne B" first="Barbara" last="Payne">Barbara Payne</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j" type="main">Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology</title><title level="j" type="alt">COMMUNITY DENTISTRY ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY</title><idno type="ISSN">0301-5661</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0528</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">29</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="373">373</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="381">381</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-10">2001-10</date></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0301-5661</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0301-5661</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Allen locker</term><term>Baycrest centre</term><term>Behavioural</term><term>Behavioural impacts</term><term>Behavioural outcomes</term><term>Centre</term><term>Chapel hill</term><term>Chronic care hospital</term><term>Clinical trial</term><term>Clinical trials</term><term>Community dent</term><term>Concurrent validity</term><term>Content validity</term><term>Daily life</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dent educ</term><term>Dental care facility</term><term>Dental charts</term><term>Dental ecology</term><term>Dental status</term><term>Dentate</term><term>Dentate participants</term><term>Denture</term><term>Elderly people</term><term>Elderly population</term><term>Functional limitations</term><term>Further work</term><term>General health</term><term>Geriatric care</term><term>Gohai</term><term>Gohai score</term><term>Gohai scores</term><term>Greater weight</term><term>Health assessment index</term><term>Health domains</term><term>High prevalence</term><term>High rates</term><term>Higher scores</term><term>Independent variables</term><term>Indicator foods</term><term>Item content</term><term>Jacobs dessens</term><term>Life measures</term><term>Life outcomes</term><term>Life satisfaction</term><term>Life stress</term><term>Meaningful change</term><term>Median values</term><term>Medical conditions</term><term>More dentures</term><term>Odds ratios</term><term>Ohrqol</term><term>Older adult populations</term><term>Older adults</term><term>Oral conditions</term><term>Oral disorders</term><term>Oral health</term><term>Oral health impact</term><term>Oral health impact community dent health</term><term>Oral health status</term><term>Oral health surveys</term><term>Oral quality</term><term>Partial denture</term><term>Participant</term><term>Patient populations</term><term>Personal interview</term><term>Physical disability</term><term>Psychological outcomes</term><term>Psychosocial impacts</term><term>Rank correlations</term><term>Response codes</term><term>Response format</term><term>Short form</term><term>Similar measures</term><term>Simple count</term><term>Simple count methods</term><term>Single item</term><term>Stress questionnaire</term><term>Target population</term><term>Tooth loss</term><term>Usual jobs</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Allen locker</term><term>Baycrest centre</term><term>Behavioural</term><term>Behavioural impacts</term><term>Behavioural outcomes</term><term>Centre</term><term>Chapel hill</term><term>Chronic care hospital</term><term>Clinical trial</term><term>Clinical trials</term><term>Community dent</term><term>Concurrent validity</term><term>Content validity</term><term>Daily life</term><term>Dent</term><term>Dent educ</term><term>Dental care facility</term><term>Dental charts</term><term>Dental ecology</term><term>Dental status</term><term>Dentate</term><term>Dentate participants</term><term>Denture</term><term>Elderly people</term><term>Elderly population</term><term>Functional limitations</term><term>Further work</term><term>General health</term><term>Geriatric care</term><term>Gohai</term><term>Gohai score</term><term>Gohai scores</term><term>Greater weight</term><term>Health assessment index</term><term>Health domains</term><term>High prevalence</term><term>High rates</term><term>Higher scores</term><term>Independent variables</term><term>Indicator foods</term><term>Item content</term><term>Jacobs dessens</term><term>Life measures</term><term>Life outcomes</term><term>Life satisfaction</term><term>Life stress</term><term>Meaningful change</term><term>Median values</term><term>Medical conditions</term><term>More dentures</term><term>Odds ratios</term><term>Ohrqol</term><term>Older adult populations</term><term>Older adults</term><term>Oral conditions</term><term>Oral disorders</term><term>Oral health</term><term>Oral health impact</term><term>Oral health impact community dent health</term><term>Oral health status</term><term>Oral health surveys</term><term>Oral quality</term><term>Partial denture</term><term>Participant</term><term>Patient populations</term><term>Personal interview</term><term>Physical disability</term><term>Psychological outcomes</term><term>Psychosocial impacts</term><term>Rank correlations</term><term>Response codes</term><term>Response format</term><term>Short form</term><term>Similar measures</term><term>Simple count</term><term>Simple count methods</term><term>Single item</term><term>Stress questionnaire</term><term>Target population</term><term>Tooth loss</term><term>Usual jobs</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">Abstract – Objectives: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly. Methods: Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre. Results: The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><keywords><teeft><json:string>gohai</json:string><json:string>oral health</json:string><json:string>dentate</json:string><json:string>oral quality</json:string><json:string>ohrqol</json:string><json:string>denture</json:string><json:string>behavioural</json:string><json:string>odds ratios</json:string><json:string>oral health status</json:string><json:string>life satisfaction</json:string><json:string>clinical trials</json:string><json:string>oral disorders</json:string><json:string>functional limitations</json:string><json:string>life outcomes</json:string><json:string>simple count methods</json:string><json:string>behavioural impacts</json:string><json:string>item content</json:string><json:string>gohai scores</json:string><json:string>oral conditions</json:string><json:string>general health</json:string><json:string>stress questionnaire</json:string><json:string>independent variables</json:string><json:string>partial denture</json:string><json:string>tooth loss</json:string><json:string>target population</json:string><json:string>dental care facility</json:string><json:string>baycrest centre</json:string><json:string>greater weight</json:string><json:string>short form</json:string><json:string>dental ecology</json:string><json:string>psychosocial impacts</json:string><json:string>oral health impact</json:string><json:string>elderly population</json:string><json:string>chapel hill</json:string><json:string>older adult populations</json:string><json:string>dentate participants</json:string><json:string>concurrent validity</json:string><json:string>dent</json:string><json:string>daily life</json:string><json:string>geriatric care</json:string><json:string>community dent</json:string><json:string>health domains</json:string><json:string>jacobs dessens</json:string><json:string>behavioural outcomes</json:string><json:string>content validity</json:string><json:string>elderly people</json:string><json:string>usual jobs</json:string><json:string>chronic care hospital</json:string><json:string>patient populations</json:string><json:string>meaningful change</json:string><json:string>dental charts</json:string><json:string>personal interview</json:string><json:string>psychological outcomes</json:string><json:string>response format</json:string><json:string>response codes</json:string><json:string>higher scores</json:string><json:string>simple count</json:string><json:string>life stress</json:string><json:string>oral health surveys</json:string><json:string>older adults</json:string><json:string>dental status</json:string><json:string>high prevalence</json:string><json:string>more dentures</json:string><json:string>gohai score</json:string><json:string>allen locker</json:string><json:string>median values</json:string><json:string>high rates</json:string><json:string>physical disability</json:string><json:string>indicator foods</json:string><json:string>medical conditions</json:string><json:string>rank correlations</json:string><json:string>single item</json:string><json:string>similar measures</json:string><json:string>life measures</json:string><json:string>further work</json:string><json:string>health assessment index</json:string><json:string>dent educ</json:string><json:string>clinical trial</json:string><json:string>oral health impact community dent health</json:string><json:string>centre</json:string><json:string>participant</json:string></teeft></keywords><author><json:item><name>David Locker</name><affiliations><json:string>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</json:string><json:string>E-mail: david.locker@utoronto.ca</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>David Matear</name><affiliations><json:string>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Marlene Stephens</name><affiliations><json:string>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Herenia Lawrence</name><affiliations><json:string>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Barbara Payne</name><affiliations><json:string>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>oral health‐related quality of life</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>psychological well‐being</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>reliability</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>validity</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>elderly</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>CDOE290507</json:string></articleId><arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-HF5M2PCK-1</arkIstex><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Abstract – Objectives: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly. Methods: Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre. Results: The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.037</score><pdfWordCount>4813</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>30223</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.2</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>9</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>595 x 794 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>102</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>625</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>5</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><title>Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0528</json:string></doi><issn><json:string>0301-5661</json:string></issn><eissn><json:string>1600-0528</json:string></eissn><publisherId><json:string>CDOE</json:string></publisherId><volume>29</volume><issue>5</issue><pages><first>373</first><last>381</last><total>9</total></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2001</json:string><json:string>1996</json:string></date><geogName><json:string>They</json:string></geogName><orgName><json:string>University of Toronto</json:string><json:string>University of North Carolina</json:string><json:string>University of Toronto Human Subjects Certi</json:string><json:string>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Locker</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>Edward Street</json:string><json:string>David Locker</json:string><json:string>Marlene Stephens</json:string><json:string>B. Comparison</json:string><json:string>Barbara Payne</json:string><json:string>David Matear</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Canada</json:string><json:string>Toronto</json:string></placeName><ref_url></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Locker et al.</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-HF5M2PCK-1</json:string></ark><categories><wos><json:string>1 - social science</json:string><json:string>2 - public, environmental & occupational health</json:string><json:string>1 - science</json:string><json:string>2 - dentistry, oral surgery & medicine</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>1 - health sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - clinical medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - dentistry</json:string></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Medicine</json:string><json:string>3 - Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health</json:string><json:string>1 - Health Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Dentistry</json:string><json:string>3 - General Dentistry</json:string></scopus></categories><publicationDate>2001</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2001</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x</json:string></doi><id>4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-10"></date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="content-type" subtype="article" source="article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</note><note type="publication-type" subtype="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="article"><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><title level="a" type="short">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14</title><author xml:id="author-0000" role="corresp"><persName><forename type="first">David</forename><surname>Locker</surname></persName><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation><affiliation>Dr David Locker, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, 124, Edward Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1G6
Tel: +1 416 979 4907
Fax: +1 416 979 4936
e‐mail: david.locker@utoronto.ca</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">David</forename><surname>Matear</surname></persName><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Marlene</forename><surname>Stephens</surname></persName><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Herenia</forename><surname>Lawrence</surname></persName><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">Barbara</forename><surname>Payne</surname></persName><affiliation>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada<address><country key="CA"></country></address></affiliation></author><idno type="istex">4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-HF5M2PCK-1</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x</idno><idno type="unit">CDOE290507</idno><idno type="supplier">com1o008</idno><idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:CDOE.CDOE290507.pdf</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j" type="main">Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology</title><title level="j" type="alt">COMMUNITY DENTISTRY ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY</title><idno type="pISSN">0301-5661</idno><idno type="eISSN">1600-0528</idno><idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0528</idno><idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/com.2001.29.issue-5</idno><idno type="product">CDOE</idno><idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno><imprint><biblScope unit="vol">29</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="373">373</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="381">381</biblScope><biblScope unit="page-count">9</biblScope><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Copenhagen</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-10"></date></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p><hi rend="bold">Abstract –</hi><hi rend="italic">Objectives</hi><hi rend="italic">Methods:</hi><hi rend="italic">Results:</hi><:t>: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly.</:t><:t>Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre.</:t><:t>The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a</:t></p><p>GOHAI score of zero and 30.3% an OHIP‐14 score of zero. Using the simple count method the percentage with a score of zero was 15.1% and 45.8%. Both measures discriminated between dentate subjects with and without one or more dentures, with and without a chewing problem and with and without dry mouth. Both also showed significant associations with self‐rated oral health and satisfaction with oral health status. Associations tended to be stronger between GOHAI scores and these variables. The measures were equally good at predicting overall psychological well‐being and life satisfaction. Although the GOHAI identified more oral functional and psychosocial impacts than the OHIP‐14, neither was markedly superior to the other when used as discriminatory measures. However, the high prevalence of subjects with zero scores may compromise the ability of the OHIP‐14 to detect within‐subject change.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">oral health‐related quality of life</term><term xml:id="k2">psychological well‐being</term><term xml:id="k3">reliability</term><term xml:id="k4">validity</term><term xml:id="k5">elderly</term></keywords><keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Original Articles</term></keywords></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en"></language></langUsage></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change>undefined</change><change>[object Object]</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisherName><publisherLoc>Copenhagen</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0528</doi><issn type="print">0301-5661</issn><issn type="electronic">1600-0528</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="CDOE"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="COMMUNITY DENTISTRY ORAL EPIDEMIOLOGY">Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="10005"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/com.2001.29.issue-5</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="29">29</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="5">5</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2001-10">October 2001</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0037300" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="CDOE290507"></id><id type="supplier" value="com1o008"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="9"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title></titleGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2008-07-07"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2008-07-07"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:Header result:Header" date="2010-03-09"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-08"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-16"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="373">373</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="381">381</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Dr David Locker, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, 124, Edward Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G 1G6
Tel: +1 416 979 4907
Fax: +1 416 979 4936
e‐mail: <email>david.locker@utoronto.ca</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:CDOE.CDOE290507.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Submitted 7 August 2000;accepted 10 January 2001</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="0"></count><count type="formulaTotal" number="0"></count><count type="referenceTotal" number="0"></count><count type="wordTotal" number="5882"></count><count type="linksPubMed" number="0"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="0"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title><title type="shortAuthors">Locker et al.</title><title type="short">Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1" corresponding="yes"><personName><givenNames>David</givenNames><familyName>Locker</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>David</givenNames><familyName>Matear</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Marlene</givenNames><familyName>Stephens</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr4" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Herenia</givenNames><familyName>Lawrence</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr5" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Barbara</givenNames><familyName>Payne</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="CA"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">oral health‐related quality of life</keyword><keyword xml:id="k2">psychological well‐being</keyword><keyword xml:id="k3">reliability</keyword><keyword xml:id="k4">validity</keyword><keyword xml:id="k5">elderly</keyword></keywordGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p><b>Abstract –</b> <i>Objectives</i>: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly. <i>Methods:</i> Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre. <i>Results:</i> The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a</p><p>GOHAI score of zero and 30.3% an OHIP‐14 score of zero. Using the simple count method the percentage with a score of zero was 15.1% and 45.8%. Both measures discriminated between dentate subjects with and without one or more dentures, with and without a chewing problem and with and without dry mouth. Both also showed significant associations with self‐rated oral health and satisfaction with oral health status. Associations tended to be stronger between GOHAI scores and these variables. The measures were equally good at predicting overall psychological well‐being and life satisfaction. Although the GOHAI identified more oral functional and psychosocial impacts than the OHIP‐14, neither was markedly superior to the other when used as discriminatory measures. However, the high prevalence of subjects with zero scores may compromise the ability of the OHIP‐14 to detect within‐subject change.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">David</namePart><namePart type="family">Locker</namePart><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: david.locker@utoronto.ca</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">David</namePart><namePart type="family">Matear</namePart><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Marlene</namePart><namePart type="family">Stephens</namePart><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Herenia</namePart><namePart type="family">Lawrence</namePart><affiliation>Community Dental Health Services Research Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Toronto, Ontario,</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Barbara</namePart><namePart type="family">Payne</namePart><affiliation>Department of Sociology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-6N5SZHKN-D">article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Copenhagen</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2001-10</dateIssued><edition>Submitted 7 August 2000;accepted 10 January 2001</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2001</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><extent unit="figures">0</extent><extent unit="tables">0</extent><extent unit="formulas">0</extent><extent unit="references">0</extent><extent unit="linksCrossRef">0</extent><extent unit="words">5882</extent></physicalDescription><abstract>Abstract – Objectives: This paper compares the performance of the GOHAI and the OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the compromised elderly. Methods: Data were obtained from a cross‐sectional survey of 225 participants, most of whom lived in a large geriatric care centre. Results: The mean age of subjects was 83 years and the majority had one or more chronic medical conditions and physical disabilities. Their main oral problems were high rates of tooth loss and xerostomia. Additive and simple count methods were used to derive GOHAI and OHIP‐14 scores. Using the additive method, 8.4% had a</abstract><abstract>GOHAI score of zero and 30.3% an OHIP‐14 score of zero. Using the simple count method the percentage with a score of zero was 15.1% and 45.8%. Both measures discriminated between dentate subjects with and without one or more dentures, with and without a chewing problem and with and without dry mouth. Both also showed significant associations with self‐rated oral health and satisfaction with oral health status. Associations tended to be stronger between GOHAI scores and these variables. The measures were equally good at predicting overall psychological well‐being and life satisfaction. Although the GOHAI identified more oral functional and psychosocial impacts than the OHIP‐14, neither was markedly superior to the other when used as discriminatory measures. However, the high prevalence of subjects with zero scores may compromise the ability of the OHIP‐14 to detect within‐subject change.</abstract><subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre><topic>oral health‐related quality of life</topic><topic>psychological well‐being</topic><topic>reliability</topic><topic>validity</topic><topic>elderly</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0301-5661</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1600-0528</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0528</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">CDOE</identifier><part><date>2001</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>29</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>5</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>373</start><end>381</end><total>9</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E</identifier><identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-HF5M2PCK-1</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0528.2001.290507.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">CDOE290507</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-L0C46X92-X">wiley</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Munksgaard International Publishers</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002499 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002499 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:4B35348296D0FFEEF22334F33EE6C6B3CECA0C5E
|texte= Comparison of the GOHAI and OHIP‐14 as measures of the oral health‐related quality of life of the elderly
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |