EdenteV2, Istex, Corpus, bibRecord, 004561

Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile

Identifieur interne : 004561 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 004560; suivant : 004562

Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile

Auteurs : Daniel R. Reissmann ; Mike T. John ; Oliver Schierz

Source :

European Journal of Oral Sciences [ 0909-8836 ] ; 2011-02.

RBID : ISTEX:8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64

English descriptors

Abstract

Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.   Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.

Url:

https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/pdf

DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x

Links to Exploration step

ISTEX:8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
<author><name sortKey="Reissmann, Daniel R" sort="Reissmann, Daniel R" uniqKey="Reissmann D" first="Daniel R." last="Reissmann">Daniel R. Reissmann</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="John, Mike T" sort="John, Mike T" uniqKey="John M" first="Mike T." last="John">Mike T. John</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schierz, Oliver" sort="Schierz, Oliver" uniqKey="Schierz O" first="Oliver" last="Schierz">Oliver Schierz</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno>
<idno type="RBID">ISTEX:8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64</idno>
<date when="2011" year="2011">2011</date>
<idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x</idno>
<idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/pdf</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">004561</idno>
<idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">004561</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main">Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
<author><name sortKey="Reissmann, Daniel R" sort="Reissmann, Daniel R" uniqKey="Reissmann D" first="Daniel R." last="Reissmann">Daniel R. Reissmann</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="John, Mike T" sort="John, Mike T" uniqKey="John M" first="Mike T." last="John">Mike T. John</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Schierz, Oliver" sort="Schierz, Oliver" uniqKey="Schierz O" first="Oliver" last="Schierz">Oliver Schierz</name>
<affiliation><mods:affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</mods:affiliation>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<monogr></monogr>
<series><title level="j" type="main">European Journal of Oral Sciences</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0909-8836</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1600-0722</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">119</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="73">73</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="78">78</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">6</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2011-02">2011-02</date>
</imprint>
<idno type="ISSN">0909-8836</idno>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0909-8836</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Administration method</term>
<term>Administration methods</term>
<term>Administrative method</term>
<term>Administrative methods</term>
<term>Anova</term>
<term>Clin epidemiol</term>
<term>Community dent</term>
<term>Community dent health</term>
<term>Completion rates</term>
<term>Current study</term>
<term>Daily performance</term>
<term>Data collection</term>
<term>Dental anxiety</term>
<term>Denture status</term>
<term>General health</term>
<term>General population</term>
<term>German version</term>
<term>Health measurement scales</term>
<term>Health status</term>
<term>Higher scores</term>
<term>Internal consistency</term>
<term>Intraclass correlation</term>
<term>John wiley sons</term>
<term>Life assessment</term>
<term>Lower limit</term>
<term>Materials science</term>
<term>Measurement error</term>
<term>Ohip</term>
<term>Ohip information</term>
<term>Ohip points</term>
<term>Ohip score</term>
<term>Ohip score variance</term>
<term>Ohip score variation</term>
<term>Ohip scores</term>
<term>Ohip summary scores</term>
<term>Ohip units</term>
<term>Ohrqol</term>
<term>Ohrqol assessment</term>
<term>Ohrqol assessments</term>
<term>Ohrqol information</term>
<term>Ohrqol instruments</term>
<term>Oral health</term>
<term>Oral health impact</term>
<term>Oral health impact profile</term>
<term>Oral healthrelated quality</term>
<term>Oral impacts</term>
<term>Oral quality</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Personal interview</term>
<term>Physical activity</term>
<term>Physical aspects</term>
<term>Previous studies</term>
<term>Prosthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Prosthodontic</term>
<term>Prosthodontic patients</term>
<term>Psychometric</term>
<term>Psychometric core properties</term>
<term>Psychometric properties</term>
<term>Psychosocial aspects</term>
<term>Public health</term>
<term>Qual life</term>
<term>Reissmann</term>
<term>Reliability</term>
<term>Review criteria</term>
<term>Score reliability</term>
<term>Score validity</term>
<term>Selfadministered questionnaire</term>
<term>Spearman rank correlation</term>
<term>Statistical methods</term>
<term>Study subjects</term>
<term>Telephone interview</term>
<term>Temporomandibular disorders</term>
<term>Variance</term>
<term>Variance component</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Teeft" xml:lang="en"><term>Administration method</term>
<term>Administration methods</term>
<term>Administrative method</term>
<term>Administrative methods</term>
<term>Anova</term>
<term>Clin epidemiol</term>
<term>Community dent</term>
<term>Community dent health</term>
<term>Completion rates</term>
<term>Current study</term>
<term>Daily performance</term>
<term>Data collection</term>
<term>Dental anxiety</term>
<term>Denture status</term>
<term>General health</term>
<term>General population</term>
<term>German version</term>
<term>Health measurement scales</term>
<term>Health status</term>
<term>Higher scores</term>
<term>Internal consistency</term>
<term>Intraclass correlation</term>
<term>John wiley sons</term>
<term>Life assessment</term>
<term>Lower limit</term>
<term>Materials science</term>
<term>Measurement error</term>
<term>Ohip</term>
<term>Ohip information</term>
<term>Ohip points</term>
<term>Ohip score</term>
<term>Ohip score variance</term>
<term>Ohip score variation</term>
<term>Ohip scores</term>
<term>Ohip summary scores</term>
<term>Ohip units</term>
<term>Ohrqol</term>
<term>Ohrqol assessment</term>
<term>Ohrqol assessments</term>
<term>Ohrqol information</term>
<term>Ohrqol instruments</term>
<term>Oral health</term>
<term>Oral health impact</term>
<term>Oral health impact profile</term>
<term>Oral healthrelated quality</term>
<term>Oral impacts</term>
<term>Oral quality</term>
<term>Oxford university press</term>
<term>Personal interview</term>
<term>Physical activity</term>
<term>Physical aspects</term>
<term>Previous studies</term>
<term>Prosthetic dentistry</term>
<term>Prosthodontic</term>
<term>Prosthodontic patients</term>
<term>Psychometric</term>
<term>Psychometric core properties</term>
<term>Psychometric properties</term>
<term>Psychosocial aspects</term>
<term>Public health</term>
<term>Qual life</term>
<term>Reissmann</term>
<term>Reliability</term>
<term>Review criteria</term>
<term>Score reliability</term>
<term>Score validity</term>
<term>Selfadministered questionnaire</term>
<term>Spearman rank correlation</term>
<term>Statistical methods</term>
<term>Study subjects</term>
<term>Telephone interview</term>
<term>Temporomandibular disorders</term>
<term>Variance</term>
<term>Variance component</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.   Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName>
<keywords><teeft><json:string>ohip</json:string>
<json:string>ohrqol</json:string>
<json:string>administration method</json:string>
<json:string>ohip scores</json:string>
<json:string>oral health</json:string>
<json:string>prosthodontic</json:string>
<json:string>administration methods</json:string>
<json:string>oral quality</json:string>
<json:string>prosthodontic patients</json:string>
<json:string>telephone interview</json:string>
<json:string>anova</json:string>
<json:string>ohrqol assessment</json:string>
<json:string>psychometric</json:string>
<json:string>reissmann</json:string>
<json:string>variance</json:string>
<json:string>personal interview</json:string>
<json:string>oral health impact</json:string>
<json:string>measurement error</json:string>
<json:string>psychosocial aspects</json:string>
<json:string>reliability</json:string>
<json:string>qual life</json:string>
<json:string>psychometric properties</json:string>
<json:string>oral health impact profile</json:string>
<json:string>health status</json:string>
<json:string>ohip units</json:string>
<json:string>ohip score variation</json:string>
<json:string>variance component</json:string>
<json:string>ohrqol information</json:string>
<json:string>clin epidemiol</json:string>
<json:string>current study</json:string>
<json:string>administrative methods</json:string>
<json:string>score reliability</json:string>
<json:string>ohrqol assessments</json:string>
<json:string>german version</json:string>
<json:string>higher scores</json:string>
<json:string>ohip points</json:string>
<json:string>community dent health</json:string>
<json:string>previous studies</json:string>
<json:string>administrative method</json:string>
<json:string>oral impacts</json:string>
<json:string>lower limit</json:string>
<json:string>spearman rank correlation</json:string>
<json:string>intraclass correlation</json:string>
<json:string>ohip score</json:string>
<json:string>general health</json:string>
<json:string>denture status</json:string>
<json:string>study subjects</json:string>
<json:string>ohip score variance</json:string>
<json:string>score validity</json:string>
<json:string>data collection</json:string>
<json:string>psychometric core properties</json:string>
<json:string>ohip information</json:string>
<json:string>general population</json:string>
<json:string>review criteria</json:string>
<json:string>internal consistency</json:string>
<json:string>daily performance</json:string>
<json:string>ohip summary scores</json:string>
<json:string>physical activity</json:string>
<json:string>ohrqol instruments</json:string>
<json:string>physical aspects</json:string>
<json:string>temporomandibular disorders</json:string>
<json:string>dental anxiety</json:string>
<json:string>completion rates</json:string>
<json:string>selfadministered questionnaire</json:string>
<json:string>john wiley sons</json:string>
<json:string>oral healthrelated quality</json:string>
<json:string>materials science</json:string>
<json:string>community dent</json:string>
<json:string>prosthetic dentistry</json:string>
<json:string>statistical methods</json:string>
<json:string>health measurement scales</json:string>
<json:string>oxford university press</json:string>
<json:string>life assessment</json:string>
<json:string>public health</json:string>
</teeft>
</keywords>
<author><json:item><name>Daniel R. Reissmann</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>Mike T. John</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
<json:item><name>Oliver Schierz</name>
<affiliations><json:string>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</json:string>
</affiliations>
</json:item>
</author>
<subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string>
</lang>
<value>administration method</value>
</json:item>
<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>personal interview</value>
</json:item>
<json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string>
</lang>
<value>self‐administered questionnaire</value>
</json:item>
<json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string>
</lang>
<value>telephone interview</value>
</json:item>
</subject>
<articleId><json:string>EOS805</json:string>
</articleId>
<arkIstex>ark:/67375/WNG-7WQ3J794-Q</arkIstex>
<language><json:string>eng</json:string>
</language>
<originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string>
</originalGenre>
<abstract>Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.  Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.</abstract>
<qualityIndicators><score>9.167</score>
<pdfWordCount>4275</pdfWordCount>
<pdfCharCount>28099</pdfCharCount>
<pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion>
<pdfPageCount>6</pdfPageCount>
<pdfPageSize>595.276 x 799.37 pts</pdfPageSize>
<refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative>
<abstractWordCount>241</abstractWordCount>
<abstractCharCount>1657</abstractCharCount>
<keywordCount>5</keywordCount>
</qualityIndicators>
<title>Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
<pmid><json:string>21244515</json:string>
</pmid>
<genre><json:string>article</json:string>
</genre>
<host><title>European Journal of Oral Sciences</title>
<language><json:string>unknown</json:string>
</language>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0722</json:string>
</doi>
<issn><json:string>0909-8836</json:string>
</issn>
<eissn><json:string>1600-0722</json:string>
</eissn>
<publisherId><json:string>EOS</json:string>
</publisherId>
<volume>119</volume>
<issue>1</issue>
<pages><first>73</first>
<last>78</last>
<total>6</total>
</pages>
<genre><json:string>journal</json:string>
</genre>
</host>
<namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>2011</json:string>
<json:string>2010</json:string>
</date>
<geogName></geogName>
<orgName><json:string>Department of Prosthodontics</json:string>
<json:string>University of Minnesota</json:string>
<json:string>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse</json:string>
<json:string>Germany Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O</json:string>
<json:string>Germany Telefax</json:string>
<json:string>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences</json:string>
<json:string>Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust</json:string>
<json:string>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science</json:string>
<json:string>Institutional Review Board of the Medical School, University of Leipzig</json:string>
<json:string>University of Leipzig</json:string>
</orgName>
<orgName_funder></orgName_funder>
<orgName_provider></orgName_provider>
<persName><json:string>Oliver Schierz</json:string>
<json:string>John Look</json:string>
<json:string>Mike T. John</json:string>
<json:string>Daniel R. Reissmann</json:string>
<json:string>Ms Annett</json:string>
</persName>
<placeName><json:string>Leipzig</json:string>
<json:string>Germany</json:string>
<json:string>Minnesota</json:string>
<json:string>Hong Kong</json:string>
<json:string>Hamburg</json:string>
<json:string>USA</json:string>
<json:string>MN</json:string>
</placeName>
<ref_url></ref_url>
<ref_bibl><json:string>Reissmann et al.</json:string>
<json:string>John et al.</json:string>
</ref_bibl>
<bibl></bibl>
</unitex>
</namedEntities>
<ark><json:string>ark:/67375/WNG-7WQ3J794-Q</json:string>
</ark>
<categories><wos><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 - Dentistry</json:string>
<json:string>3 - General Dentistry</json:string>
</scopus>
<inist><json:string>1 - sciences appliquees, technologies et medecines</json:string>
<json:string>2 - sciences biologiques et medicales</json:string>
<json:string>3 - sciences medicales</json:string>
<json:string>4 - nephrologie. maladies des voies urinaires</json:string>
</inist>
</categories>
<publicationDate>2011</publicationDate>
<copyrightDate>2011</copyrightDate>
<doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x</json:string>
</doi>
<id>8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64</id>
<score>1</score>
<fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension>
<original>true</original>
<mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/pdf</uri>
</json:item>
<json:item><extension>zip</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/zip</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/zip</uri>
</json:item>
<istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main">Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<availability><licence>© 2011 Eur J Oral Sci</licence>
</availability>
<date type="published" when="2011-02"></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">Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
<title level="a" type="short">OHIP administration method influence</title>
<author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Daniel R.</forename>
<surname>Reissmann</surname>
</persName>
<affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany<address><country key="DE"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Mike T.</forename>
<surname>John</surname>
</persName>
<affiliation>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA<address><country key="US"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Oliver</forename>
<surname>Schierz</surname>
</persName>
<affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany<address><country key="DE"></country>
</address>
</affiliation>
</author>
<idno type="istex">8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64</idno>
<idno type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-7WQ3J794-Q</idno>
<idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x</idno>
<idno type="unit">EOS805</idno>
<idno type="toTypesetVersion">file:EOS.EOS805.pdf</idno>
</analytic>
<monogr><title level="j" type="main">European Journal of Oral Sciences</title>
<title level="j" type="alt">EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES</title>
<idno type="pISSN">0909-8836</idno>
<idno type="eISSN">1600-0722</idno>
<idno type="book-DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0722</idno>
<idno type="book-part-DOI">10.1111/eos.2011.119.issue-1</idno>
<idno type="product">EOS</idno>
<idno type="publisherDivision">ST</idno>
<imprint><biblScope unit="vol">119</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" from="73">73</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page" to="78">78</biblScope>
<biblScope unit="page-count">6</biblScope>
<publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace>
<date type="published" when="2011-02"></date>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><abstract xml:lang="en" style="main"><p> 
               <hi rend="italic">Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.</hi>
           
               <hi rend="italic">Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci</hi> 
            </p>
<p>The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.</p>
</abstract>
<textClass><keywords xml:lang="en"><term xml:id="k1">administration method</term>
<term xml:id="k2">oral health‐related quality of life</term>
<term xml:id="k3">personal interview</term>
<term xml:id="k4">self‐administered questionnaire</term>
<term xml:id="k5">telephone interview</term>
</keywords>
<keywords rend="tocHeading1"><term>Original articles</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
<langUsage><language ident="en"></language>
</langUsage>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
</istex:fulltextTEI>
<json:item><extension>txt</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>text/plain</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/fulltext/txt</uri>
</json:item>
</fulltext>
<metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><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>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName>
<publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc>
</publisherInfo>
<doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0722</doi>
<issn type="print">0909-8836</issn>
<issn type="electronic">1600-0722</issn>
<idGroup><id type="product" value="EOS"></id>
<id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id>
</idGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main" sort="EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORAL SCIENCES">European Journal of Oral Sciences</title>
</titleGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="part" position="02101"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/eos.2011.119.issue-1</doi>
<numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="119">119</numbering>
<numbering type="journalIssue" number="1">1</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<coverDate startDate="2011-02">February 2011</coverDate>
</publicationMeta>
<publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="12" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x</doi>
<idGroup><id type="unit" value="EOS805"></id>
</idGroup>
<countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="6"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original articles</title>
</titleGroup>
<copyright>© 2011 Eur J Oral Sci</copyright>
<eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.4.3 mode:FullText" date="2011-01-19"></event>
<event type="firstOnline" date="2011-01-19"></event>
<event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2011-01-19"></event>
<event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-01-24"></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="73">73</numbering>
<numbering type="pageLast" number="78">78</numbering>
</numberingGroup>
<correspondenceTo>Daniel R. Reissmann, Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany Telefax: +49–40–741054096 E‐mail: <email>d.reissmann@uke.de</email>
</correspondenceTo>
<linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:EOS.EOS805.pdf"></link>
</linkGroup>
</publicationMeta>
<contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Accepted for publication December 2010</unparsedEditorialHistory>
<countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="0"></count>
<count type="tableTotal" number="3"></count>
</countGroup>
<titleGroup><title type="main">Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
<title type="shortAuthors"><i>Reissmann</i>
 et al.</title>
<title type="short"><i>OHIP administration method influence</i>
</title>
</titleGroup>
<creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1"><personName><givenNames>Daniel R.</givenNames>
<familyName>Reissmann</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2"><personName><givenNames>Mike T.</givenNames>
<familyName>John</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
<creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr3" affiliationRef="#a3"><personName><givenNames>Oliver</givenNames>
<familyName>Schierz</familyName>
</personName>
</creator>
</creators>
<affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1" countryCode="DE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a2" countryCode="US"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
<affiliation xml:id="a3" countryCode="DE"><unparsedAffiliation>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</unparsedAffiliation>
</affiliation>
</affiliationGroup>
<keywordGroup xml:lang="en"><keyword xml:id="k1">administration method</keyword>
<keyword xml:id="k2">oral health‐related quality of life</keyword>
<keyword xml:id="k3">personal interview</keyword>
<keyword xml:id="k4">self‐administered questionnaire</keyword>
<keyword xml:id="k5">telephone interview</keyword>
</keywordGroup>
<abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p> <i>Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.</i>
           
          <i>Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci</i>
 </p>
<p>The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.</p>
</abstract>
</abstractGroup>
</contentMeta>
</header>
</component>
</istex:document>
</istex:metadataXml>
<mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>OHIP administration method influence</title>
</titleInfo>
<titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Daniel R.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Reissmann</namePart>
<affiliation>Department of Prosthetic Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University Medical Center Hamburg‐Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Mike T.</namePart>
<namePart type="family">John</namePart>
<affiliation>Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Minnesota, Minnesota, MN, USA</affiliation>
<role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Oliver</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Schierz</namePart>
<affiliation>Department of Prosthodontics and Materials Science, School of Dentistry, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany</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>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher>
<place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm>
</place>
<dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2011-02</dateIssued>
<edition>Accepted for publication December 2010</edition>
<copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011</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">3</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<abstract lang="en">Reissmann DR, John MT, Schierz O. Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile.   Eur J Oral Sci 2011; 119: 73–78. © 2011 Eur J Oral Sci The influence of the administration method used to collect oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL) data is largely unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether OHRQoL information obtained using the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) differed with different methods of collection (personal interview, via telephone or as a self‐administered questionnaire). The OHRQoL was measured using the German version of the OHIP. The instrument was administered to each of 42 patients using three different methods, in a randomized order, about 1 wk apart. The test–retest reliability coefficient for the repeated OHIP assessment across the three methods of administration, and the magnitude of the variance component for administration method, were determined, characterizing the degree of OHIP score variation that is caused by this factor. Whereas OHIP mean score differences of 3.9 points were present between administration methods, the reliability coefficient of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) indicated that 90% of the OHIP score variation was caused by differences between subjects (and not by the administration method or measurement error). The variance component for administration method explained 0.5% of the OHIP score variation. In conclusion, the method of administration (personal interview, telephone interview or self‐administered questionnaire) did not influence substantially OHIP scores in prosthodontic patients.</abstract>
<subject lang="en"><genre>keywords</genre>
<topic>administration method</topic>
<topic>oral health‐related quality of life</topic>
<topic>personal interview</topic>
<topic>self‐administered questionnaire</topic>
<topic>telephone interview</topic>
</subject>
<relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>European Journal of Oral Sciences</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">0909-8836</identifier>
<identifier type="eISSN">1600-0722</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1600-0722</identifier>
<identifier type="PublisherID">EOS</identifier>
<part><date>2011</date>
<detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption>
<number>119</number>
</detail>
<detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption>
<number>1</number>
</detail>
<extent unit="pages"><start>73</start>
<end>78</end>
<total>6</total>
</extent>
</part>
</relatedItem>
<identifier type="istex">8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64</identifier>
<identifier type="ark">ark:/67375/WNG-7WQ3J794-Q</identifier>
<identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1600-0722.2010.00805.x</identifier>
<identifier type="ArticleID">EOS805</identifier>
<accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2011 Eur J Oral Sci</accessCondition>
<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>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin>
</recordInfo>
</mods>
<json:item><extension>json</extension>
<original>false</original>
<mimetype>application/json</mimetype>
<uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64/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 004561 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 004561 | 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:8BC0D3F079EC4CB1240BA7FB63A27F43E6061C64
   |texte=   Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32.
Data generation: Thu Nov 30 15:26:48 2017. Site generation: Tue Mar 8 16:36:20 2022

	Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur le patient édenté

Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile

Influence of administration method on oral health‐related quality of life assessment using the Oral Health Impact Profile

Source :

English descriptors

Abstract

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri