This readme.txt file was generated on <20220601> by ------------------- GENERAL INFORMATION ------------------- 1. Title of Dataset Commonalities among dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) – a Delphi consensus study 2. Author Information Principal Investigator Contact Information Name: Mike T John Institution: University of Minnesota School of Dentistry Email: johnx055@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0002-5169-7691 Associate or Co-investigator Contact Information Name: Phonsuda Chanthavisouk Institution: University of Minnesota School of Dentistry Email: chant076@umn.edu ORCID: 0000-0001-9203-9903 Coauthor: Paulson, Danna Coauthor: Pattanaik, Swaha 3. Date published or finalized for release: 05/09/2022 4. Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date) 2018 5. Geographic location of data collection (where was data collected?): Global study 6. Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: The research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research of the National Institutes of Health, USA, under the Award Numbers R01DE022331 and R01DE028059. 7. Overview of the data (abstract): Improvement of patients’ oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) is the main goal of oral health care professionals. However, OHRQoL is not a homogenous construct and how to assess it is challenging because of the large number of currently available instruments. Investigating available instruments and what they have in common would be necessary for consolidation and standardization of these instruments into a smaller set of tools. If the OHRQoL dimensions including Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact are the fundamental building blocks of the dental patient’s oral health experience, then these dimensions should be measured by generic multi-item dPROMs. In this study, a panel of 11 international dentists use the Delphi consensus process to determine how well 20 of these instruments measured the four OHRQoL dimensions. All 20 dPROMs questionnaires assessed at least one OHRQoL dimension while all four OHRQoL dimensions were measured by at least one dPROM instrument, i.e., the four OHRQoL dimensions were essential components of the patient’s oral health experience. This shows that the currently available generic multi-item dPROMs have a lot in common, in that they share Oral Function, Orofacial Pain, Orofacial Appearance, and Psychosocial Impact as targeted dimensions. Based on these commonalities, it is plausible and desirable to move towards a single four-dimensional metric to assess oral health impact in all clinical, community-based, and research settings. This step is necessary to advance evidence-based dentistry and value-based oral health care. -------------------------- SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2. Data citation: Chanthavisouk, Phonsuda; John, Mike, T; Paulson, Danna; Pattanaik, Swaha. (2022). Commonalities among dental patient-reported outcomes (dPROs) – a Delphi consensus study. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/227647. 3. Links to publications that cite or use the data: Forthcoming 4. Was data derived from another source? No 5. Terms of Use: Data Repository for the U of Minnesota (DRUM) By using these files, users agree to the Terms of Use. https://conservancy.umn.edu/pages/drum/policies/#terms-of-use --------------------- DATA & FILE OVERVIEW --------------------- 1. File List A. Filename: dimensionality assessment and table PLOS data set.dta Short description: dimensionality assessment and table B. Filename: reliability assessment PLOS data set.dta Short description: reliability assessment -------------------------- METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION -------------------------- 1. Description of methods used for collection/generation of data: Qualtrics survey with data management with statistical software Stata 2. Methods for processing the data: Qualtrics survey with data management with statistical software Stata 3. Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data: STATA 4. Standards and calibration information, if appropriate: None 5. Environmental/experimental conditions: Survey 6. Describe any quality-assurance procedures performed on the data: Plausibility checks 7. People involved with sample collection, processing, analysis and/or submission: Coauthors listed above ------------------------------------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: reliability assessment PLOS data set -------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 5 2. Number of cases/rows: 1440 3. Missing data codes: Empty field 4. Variable List A. Name: rater rating dimension instrument round Description: rater B. Name: rating dimension instrument round Description: rating C. Name: dimension Description: OHRQoL dimension D. Name: instrument Description: OHRQoL instrument indicator E. Name: round Description: Delphi round --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: dimensionality assessment and table PLOS data set --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Number of variables: 11 2. Number of cases/rows: 80 3. Missing data codes: Empty field 4. Variable List A. Name: rater1 Description: rater 1 B. Name: rater2 Description: rater 2 C. Name: rater3 Description: rater 3 D. Name: rater4 Description: rater 4 E. Name: rater5 Description: rater 5 F. Name: rater7 Description: rater 7 G. Name: rater8 Description: rater 8 H. Name: rater9 Description: rater 9 I. Name: rater10 Description: rater 10 J. Name: dimension Description: OHRQoL dimension K. Name: instrument Description: OHRQoL instrument indicator