↓ Skip to main content

Dental caries and quality of life of preschool children: discriminant validity of the ECOHIS

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dental caries and quality of life of preschool children: discriminant validity of the ECOHIS
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1590/1807-3107bor-2017.vol31.0024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meire Coelho Ferreira, Maria Letícia Ramos-Jorge, Leandro Silva Marques, Fernanda de Oliveira Ferreira

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to confirm the discriminant validity (obtained using traditional statistical methods) of the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale (ECOHIS) between preschool children with and without caries (mean score) through an evaluation of the effect size. A systematic search of electronic databases and a manual search were performed for studies published up to December 2015 involving the use of the ECOHIS for the evaluation of the impact of dental caries on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) among preschool children. Two independent raters performed the selection of the studies and data extraction. Only papers published in English and Spanish were selected. No restrictions were imposed regarding the year of publication. Twelve studies were included, and the magnitude of standardized differences between the means of the "without caries" and "with caries" groups was calculated using Cohen's d. Most studies demonstrated a large magnitude in the difference between the groups evaluated. The estimate of the effect size confirmed the discriminant validity of the ECOHIS obtained through traditional statistics. Thus, the magnitude of the difference should be considered an important analytical tool for the confirmation of statistical findings regarding null hypotheses and demonstrates the clinical significance of these research results.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Professor 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 38 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Materials Science 2 2%
Decision Sciences 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 42 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#272
of 509 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,567
of 323,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 509 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 323,209 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.