Casey D Wright1, Brenda Heaton2, Daniel W McNeil1,3. 1. Department of Psychology, Eberly College of Arts and Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV. 2. Department of Health Policy and Health Services Research, Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston University, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Dental and Rural Practice, School of Dentistry, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-report measures of periodontal disease have utility for screening, but have not capitalized on a latent variable approach based on psychometric theory to validate such measures. This study aimed to develop a psychometrically valid self-report measure of periodontal disease using latent variable factor analysis and other evidence-based psychometric analyses. METHODS: Likert-type items reflecting periodontal disease were administered to a sample of adults (n = 828) in the United States via an online survey. Items were adapted from prior self-report measures or were newly developed based on psychometric item development theory and theoretical knowledge of periodontal disease. Psychometric analyses included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, parallel analysis, and a calculation of internal consistency. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was indicative of the goodness-of-fit with two factors (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.97; Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = 0.96; standardized root mean squared residual = 0.06); five of the 22 original survey questions were eliminated based on the results of this EFA. Parallel analysis supported a two-factor model to represent the similarities across items-one factor reflecting physiologic components and another reflecting functional components of periodontal disease. Confirmatory Factor Analysis also indicated adequate model fit (RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.98; and weighted root mean square residual = 1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analyses of a new 17-item periodontal disease self-report measure provided initial evidence of construct/factor validity. This approach to developing self-report periodontal disease measures may facilitate useful and cost-effective estimates of periodontal disease and provide a testable scale. Future work should include clinical validation.
BACKGROUND: Self-report measures of periodontal disease have utility for screening, but have not capitalized on a latent variable approach based on psychometric theory to validate such measures. This study aimed to develop a psychometrically valid self-report measure of periodontal disease using latent variable factor analysis and other evidence-based psychometric analyses. METHODS: Likert-type items reflecting periodontal disease were administered to a sample of adults (n = 828) in the United States via an online survey. Items were adapted from prior self-report measures or were newly developed based on psychometric item development theory and theoretical knowledge of periodontal disease. Psychometric analyses included exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, parallel analysis, and a calculation of internal consistency. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was indicative of the goodness-of-fit with two factors (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.08; comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.97; Tucker Lewis index (TLI) = 0.96; standardized root mean squared residual = 0.06); five of the 22 original survey questions were eliminated based on the results of this EFA. Parallel analysis supported a two-factor model to represent the similarities across items-one factor reflecting physiologic components and another reflecting functional components of periodontal disease. Confirmatory Factor Analysis also indicated adequate model fit (RMSEA = 0.07; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.98; and weighted root mean square residual = 1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analyses of a new 17-item periodontal disease self-report measure provided initial evidence of construct/factor validity. This approach to developing self-report periodontal disease measures may facilitate useful and cost-effective estimates of periodontal disease and provide a testable scale. Future work should include clinical validation.
Authors: Eduardo Montero; Martina La Rosa; Eduard Montanya; Alfonso L Calle-Pascual; Robert J Genco; Mariano Sanz; David Herrera Journal: J Periodontal Res Date: 2019-12-24 Impact factor: 4.419
Authors: Renata Magalhães Cyrino; Luís Otávio Miranda Cota; Eugênio José Pereira Lages; Elizabeth Maria Bastos Lages; Fernando Oliveira Costa Journal: J Periodontol Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 6.993
Authors: Honghu Liu; Carl A Maida; Vladimir W Spolsky; Jie Shen; Helen Li; Xiaomeng Zhou; Marvin Marcus Journal: Community Dent Oral Epidemiol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 3.383
Authors: Yiqiang Zhan; Birte Holtfreter; Peter Meisel; Thomas Hoffmann; Wolfgang Micheelis; Thomas Dietrich; Thomas Kocher Journal: J Clin Periodontol Date: 2014-01-05 Impact factor: 8.728