Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2026
Online validation of DC/TMD Axis II questionnaires for assessing temporomandibular disorders.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Uzunçıbuk Hande, Marrapodi Maria Maddalena, Meto Aida, Di Blasio Marco, Ronsivalle Vincenzo, Russo Diana, Cicciù Marco, Minervini Giuseppe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the consistency and dependability of the online and traditional analog versions of the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) Axis II Evaluation Questionnaires.
METHODS: In a randomized manner, 100 participants completed the questionnaires in both traditional analog and online formats using Google Forms. Internal consistency was tested using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient, with the criterion being >0.700. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was applied for the calculation of the analog-online test agreement levels. The mean differences between the online and analog questionnaires were used to calculate effect sizes (ES).
RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha coefficients of all scales exceeded 0.700, suggesting satisfactory internal consistency. The ICC values ranged between 0.950 (95% CI: 0.926-0.966) and 0.999 (95% CI: 0.999-0.999), suggesting strong agreement between formats. All the effect sizes fell within the small to medium range, congruently supporting consistency between methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The present findings indicate that the online version of the DC/TMD Axis II Evaluation Questionnaires can be a reliable instrument for evaluating symptoms in respect to temporomandibular disorders.
METHODS: In a randomized manner, 100 participants completed the questionnaires in both traditional analog and online formats using Google Forms. Internal consistency was tested using the Cronbach's alpha coefficient, with the criterion being >0.700. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was applied for the calculation of the analog-online test agreement levels. The mean differences between the online and analog questionnaires were used to calculate effect sizes (ES).
RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha coefficients of all scales exceeded 0.700, suggesting satisfactory internal consistency. The ICC values ranged between 0.950 (95% CI: 0.926-0.966) and 0.999 (95% CI: 0.999-0.999), suggesting strong agreement between formats. All the effect sizes fell within the small to medium range, congruently supporting consistency between methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The present findings indicate that the online version of the DC/TMD Axis II Evaluation Questionnaires can be a reliable instrument for evaluating symptoms in respect to temporomandibular disorders.