Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 4 Methodological quality of the measurement property “validity” by the COSMIN and quality criteria of the measurement properties per assessment

From: Measurement properties of oral health assessments for non-dental healthcare professionals in older people: a systematic review

AssessmentStudyValidity
Content validityCross-cultural validityCriterion Validity
MQMQMQ
ROAGAndersson et al. (2002b) [25]PoorN.A.    
Hanne et al. (2012) [30]  PoorN.A.  
Paulsson et al. (2008) [36]    PoorN.A.
Ribeiro et al. (2014) [37]  Fair?Gooda?
(Sens: 0.17-0.80)
(Spec: 0.69-0.98)
OHATChalmers et al. (2005) [17]PoorN.A.  PoorN.A.
THROATDickinson et al. (2001) [19]PoorN.A.    
DHRFjeld et al. (2017) [29]PoorN.A.  Fair+
(r(s) = 0.78)
BOHSEKayser-Jones et al. (1995) [33]PoorN.A.    
Lin et al. (1999) [34]    Gooda-
(r: 0.351-0.578)
  1. M = Assessment of methodological quality: “excellent”, “good”, “fair”, “poor”’ by COSMIN. Q = criteria for measurement properties; + = positive rating;? = indeterminate rating; − = negative rating.
  2. aFor criterion validity, a non-dental healthcare professional was the index-rater, a dentist was used as reference-rater
  3. N.A. Not applicable was reported for the quality criteria when an article had poor methodological quality.