| Title |
Psychometric findings and normative values for the CLEFT-Q based on 2434 children and young adult patients with cleft lip and/or palate from 12 countries
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1503/cmaj.170289 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anne F Klassen, Karen Wy Wong Riff, Natasha M Longmire, Asteria Albert, Gregory C Allen, Mustafa Asim Aydin, Stephen B Baker, Stefan J Cano, Andrew J Chan, Douglas J Courtemanche, Marieke M Dreise, Jesse A Goldstein, Timothy E E Goodacre, Karen E Harman, Montserrat Munill, Aisling O Mahony, Mirta Palomares Aguilera, Petra Peterson, Andrea L Pusic, Rona Slator, Mia Stiernman, Elena Tsangaris, Sunil S Tholpady, Federico Vargas, Christopher R Forrest |
| Abstract |
Patients with cleft lip and/or palate can undergo numerous procedures to improve appearance, speech, dentition and hearing. We developed a cleft-specific patient-reported outcome instrument to facilitate rigorous international measurement and benchmarking. Data were collected from patients aged 8-29 years with cleft lip and/or palate at 30 hospitals in 12 countries between October 2014 and November 2016. Rasch measurement theory analysis was used to refine the scales and to examine reliability and validity. Normative CLEFT-Q values were computed for age, sex and cleft type. Analysis led to the refinement of an eating and drinking checklist and 12 scales measuring appearance (of the face, nose, nostrils, teeth, lips, jaws and cleft lip scar), health-related quality of life (psychological, social, school, speech distress) and speech function. All scales met the requirements of the Rasch model. Analysis to explore differential item functioning by age, sex and country provided evidence to support the use of a common scoring algorithm for each scale for international use. Lower (worse) scores on CLEFT-Q scales were associated with having a speech problem, being unhappy with facial appearance, and needing future cleft-related treatments, providing evidence of construct validity. Normative values for age, sex and cleft type showed poorer outcomes associated with older age, female sex and having a visible cleft. The CLEFT-Q represents a rigorously developed instrument that can be used internationally to collect and compare evidence-based outcomes data from patients aged 8-29 years of age with cleft lip and/or palate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 21% |
| United States | 3 | 21% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Ireland | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 36% |
| Scientists | 2 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 143 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 11% |
| Researcher | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 56 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
| Psychology | 7 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 11% |
| Unknown | 62 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,562,459
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#1,967
of 8,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,431
of 327,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#56
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,384 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.