{"title":"曼彻斯特口腔面部疼痛障碍量表（MOPDS）在口腔面部患者和非临床人群中测量生物心理社会因素的不变性：临床调查的证据。","authors":"Yao Feng, Yi-Fan Yang, Yun-Zhi Feng, Yue Guo","doi":"10.1111/joor.14010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Orofacial pain (OFP) harms mental health and functionality. The Manchester Orofacial Pain Disability Scale (MOPDS) is a questionnaire for assessing OFP.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the Chinese version of MOPDS in clinical populations, measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex cohorts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This study recruited 387 OFP clinical patients. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the internal consistency and factor structure of the MOPDS. Pearson's correlation coefficient assessed external convergent validity. Composite reliability (CR), the average variance extracted (AVE) and the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) were used to assess internal convergent and discriminate validity. Multigroup CFA explored the measurement invariance. T-test compared scores between sex groups across various clinical statuses.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>MOPDS in the clinical sample (Cronbach's α = 0.975, McDonald's omega = 0.975) had an acceptable internal consistency. CFA supported the two-factor structure in clinical settings with physical and psychosocial dimensions, which was applicable among different sexes and clinical groups. CR, AVE, HTMT, and correlation coefficient results with other scales proved the convergent and discriminant validity of MOPDS. Multigroup CFA supported scalar measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex groups. The females did not have significantly higher average scores (<i>p</i> > 0.05), and clinical samples had significantly higher average scores (<i>p</i> < 0.01).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>The Chinese version of MOPDS is a reliable and effective instrument in clinical settings for assessing the physical and psychosocial disabilities caused by OFP by helping to develop personalised treatment plans.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","volume":"52 11","pages":"2074-2083"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measurement Invariance of the Manchester Orofacial Pain Disability Scale (MOPDS) for Biopsychosocial Factor Among Orofacial Patients and Nonclinical Populations: An Evidence for Clinical Investigations\",\"authors\":\"Yao Feng, Yi-Fan Yang, Yun-Zhi Feng, Yue Guo\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joor.14010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Orofacial pain (OFP) harms mental health and functionality. The Manchester Orofacial Pain Disability Scale (MOPDS) is a questionnaire for assessing OFP.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the Chinese version of MOPDS in clinical populations, measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex cohorts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study recruited 387 OFP clinical patients. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the internal consistency and factor structure of the MOPDS. Pearson's correlation coefficient assessed external convergent validity. Composite reliability (CR), the average variance extracted (AVE) and the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) were used to assess internal convergent and discriminate validity. Multigroup CFA explored the measurement invariance. T-test compared scores between sex groups across various clinical statuses.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>MOPDS in the clinical sample (Cronbach's α = 0.975, McDonald's omega = 0.975) had an acceptable internal consistency. CFA supported the two-factor structure in clinical settings with physical and psychosocial dimensions, which was applicable among different sexes and clinical groups. CR, AVE, HTMT, and correlation coefficient results with other scales proved the convergent and discriminant validity of MOPDS. Multigroup CFA supported scalar measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex groups. The females did not have significantly higher average scores (<i>p</i> > 0.05), and clinical samples had significantly higher average scores (<i>p</i> < 0.01).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>The Chinese version of MOPDS is a reliable and effective instrument in clinical settings for assessing the physical and psychosocial disabilities caused by OFP by helping to develop personalised treatment plans.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16605,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of oral rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\"52 11\",\"pages\":\"2074-2083\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of oral rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joor.14010\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joor.14010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measurement Invariance of the Manchester Orofacial Pain Disability Scale (MOPDS) for Biopsychosocial Factor Among Orofacial Patients and Nonclinical Populations: An Evidence for Clinical Investigations
Background
Orofacial pain (OFP) harms mental health and functionality. The Manchester Orofacial Pain Disability Scale (MOPDS) is a questionnaire for assessing OFP.
Objectives
The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the Chinese version of MOPDS in clinical populations, measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex cohorts.
Methods
This study recruited 387 OFP clinical patients. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) assessed the internal consistency and factor structure of the MOPDS. Pearson's correlation coefficient assessed external convergent validity. Composite reliability (CR), the average variance extracted (AVE) and the heterotrait–monotrait ratio (HTMT) were used to assess internal convergent and discriminate validity. Multigroup CFA explored the measurement invariance. T-test compared scores between sex groups across various clinical statuses.
Results
MOPDS in the clinical sample (Cronbach's α = 0.975, McDonald's omega = 0.975) had an acceptable internal consistency. CFA supported the two-factor structure in clinical settings with physical and psychosocial dimensions, which was applicable among different sexes and clinical groups. CR, AVE, HTMT, and correlation coefficient results with other scales proved the convergent and discriminant validity of MOPDS. Multigroup CFA supported scalar measurement invariance across different clinical statuses and sex groups. The females did not have significantly higher average scores (p > 0.05), and clinical samples had significantly higher average scores (p < 0.01).
Conclusions
The Chinese version of MOPDS is a reliable and effective instrument in clinical settings for assessing the physical and psychosocial disabilities caused by OFP by helping to develop personalised treatment plans.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation aims to be the most prestigious journal of dental research within all aspects of oral rehabilitation and applied oral physiology. It covers all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to re-establish a subjective and objective harmonious oral function.
Oral rehabilitation may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, orofacial traumas, or a variety of dental and oral diseases (primarily dental caries and periodontal diseases) and orofacial pain conditions. As such, oral rehabilitation in the twenty-first century is a matter of skilful diagnosis and minimal, appropriate intervention, the nature of which is intimately linked to a profound knowledge of oral physiology, oral biology, and dental and oral pathology.
The scientific content of the journal therefore strives to reflect the best of evidence-based clinical dentistry. Modern clinical management should be based on solid scientific evidence gathered about diagnostic procedures and the properties and efficacy of the chosen intervention (e.g. material science, biological, toxicological, pharmacological or psychological aspects). The content of the journal also reflects documentation of the possible side-effects of rehabilitation, and includes prognostic perspectives of the treatment modalities chosen.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
