This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

41/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 41 out of 100. Caregiving

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background The Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT) was a component of the Best Practice Oral Health Model for Australian Residential Care study. The OHAT provided institutional carers with a simple, eight category screening tool to assess residents' oral health, including those with dementia. This analysis presents OHAT reliability and validity results. Methods A convenience sample of 21 residential care facilities (RCFs) in urban and rural Victoria, NSW and South Australia used the OHAT at baseline, three-months and six-months to assess intra- and inter-carer reliability and concurrent validity. Results Four hundred and fifty five residents completed all study phases. Intra-carer reliability for OHAT categories: percent agreement ranged from 74.4 per cent for oral cleanliness, to 93.9 per cent for dental pain; Kappa statistics were in moderate range (0.51-0.60) for lips, saliva, oral cleanliness, and for all other categories in range of 0.61-0.80 (substantial agreement) (p Conclusion The Oral Health Assessment Tool was evaluated as being a reliable and valid screening assessment tool for use in residential care facilities, including those with cognitively impaired residents.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Chalmers, J. M., King, P. L., Spencer, A. J., Wright, F. A., & Carter, K. D. (2005). The oral health assessment tool--validity and reliability. Australian dental journal. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2005.tb00360.x

Vancouver

Chalmers JM, King PL, Spencer AJ, Wright FA, Carter KD. The oral health assessment tool--validity and reliability. Australian dental journal. 2005. doi:10.1111/j.1834-7819.2005.tb00360.x. PMID: 16238218.

BibTeX

@article{chalmers2005-16238218,
  author  = {Chalmers, J. M. and King, P. L. and Spencer, A. J. and Wright, F. A. and Carter, K. D.},
  title   = {{The oral health assessment tool--validity and reliability}},
  journal = {Australian dental journal},
  year    = {2005},
  doi     = {10.1111/j.1834-7819.2005.tb00360.x},
  pmid    = {16238218},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2005.tb00360.x}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

This analysis presents OHAT reliability and validity results.
Results Four hundred and fifty five residents completed all study phases.

Why it matters

This analysis found the Oral Health Assessment Tool to be a reliable and valid screening tool for assessing oral health in residential care facilities, including residents with cognitive impairment. It is an assessment tool for oral health and does not address treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Caregiving →

Study details

Evidence strengthLow

How this study scored 41/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Australian dental journal)
Journal's citation record	1 / 4	Australian Dental Journal: journal h-index 124 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	0 / 12	No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence	1 / 5	Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	1 / 5	2005 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	6 / 7	Cited 484 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	4 / 5	21.0 citations a year over 23 year(s) since 2005
Impact for its field and year	2 / 6	Cited 1.4× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	3 / 4	Cited 177 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	2 / 4	Last-listed author Knute D. Carter: h-index 20 (OpenAlex, whole career)
Institution's track record	1 / 3	University of Iowa: institution h-index 1,080 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	1 / 3	OpenAlex lists 3 institution(s) in 3 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16238218)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Total	41 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Related studies in Caregiving

Also in Caregiving

70 studies in the library are filed under Caregiving with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Caregiving hub.

Similar studies

More on Caregiving

See all studies in Caregiving →