Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test

📜
Abstract

The Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test (T-HALT) is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to evaluate the psychosocial and functional impacts of bad breath on individuals within Thailand. While Halitosis is fundamentally an oral health condition often linked to volatile sulfur compounds, its most profound effects are frequently psychological, leading to social withdrawal, anxiety, and diminished self-esteem. Recognizing that general oral health surveys fail to capture the nuanced burden of this specific condition, researchers adapted the original Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test (HALT) to ensure cultural and linguistic relevance for Thai populations.

Developing the T-HALT involved a rigorous process of forward-backward translation followed by extensive psychometric testing. The instrument bridges a critical gap in dental and health psychology by providing a standardized way to quantify how patients subjectively experience their condition. Interestingly, the scale highlights a fascinating divergence between objective clinical reality and subjective psychological experience: a patient's Quality of life is heavily dictated by their own perception of their breath, rather than the actual, machine-measured levels of odor-causing gases in their mouth.

For researchers and clinicians, the T-HALT serves as a vital tool for holistic patient care. It underscores the necessity of treating the psychological distress associated with Halitosis alongside the physiological causes. By offering a reliable, culturally validated measure, the T-HALT enables more accurate assessments of treatment efficacy, ensuring that interventions successfully improve the patient's daily social functioning and mental well-being.

🏷
Keywords
Halitosis
Quality of life
oral health-related quality of life
psychometrics
Cross-cultural validation
health psychology

📊 Psychometric Scorecard

Structure
Multidimensional
Cronbach's α
0.94
Validation Country
📍 Thailand

Translation Method: Forward-backward translation

Authors

👤 Yodhathai Satravaha
🏛 Mahidol University

👤 Katkarn Thitiwatpalakarn
🏛 Mahidol University

👤 Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn
🏛 Mahidol University

👤 Supatchai Boonpratham
🏛 Mahidol University

👤 Chaiyapol Chaweewannakorn
🏛 Mahidol University

👤 Kawin Sipiyaruk
✉ [email protected]
🏛 Mahidol University

Purpose

The primary objective of the T-HALT is to provide a culturally tailored, condition-specific metric for evaluating how Halitosis disrupts the daily lives and psychological well-being of Thai individuals. Broad health surveys like the SF-36 or even oral-specific tools like the OHIP often lack the granularity needed to detect the unique social anxieties and behavioral modifications—such as covering one's mouth or avoiding close conversations—that characterize Halitosis.

This instrument is crucial for both clinical practice and epidemiological research in Thailand. It allows dental professionals and health psychologists to measure the subjective severity of a patient's distress, which is essential because clinical measurements of breath odor do not always align with the patient's psychological burden. By utilizing the T-HALT, practitioners can better tailor their therapeutic approaches, ensuring that psychological reassurance and social confidence restoration are integrated into standard oral care.

Construct

The T-HALT measures Halitosis-related Quality of life, a specialized facet of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL). This construct captures the multidimensional ways in which perceived bad breath interferes with an individual's psychological state, social interactions, and daily functioning. It operates on the theoretical premise that the subjective experience of an illness often dictates behavioral and emotional outcomes more strongly than the objective pathology itself.

While the construct can be evaluated as a single, overarching index of Halitosis-induced burden, psychometric evaluations reveal a more complex underlying architecture. The Thai adaptation demonstrated a four-factor structure, reflecting different domains of impact. However, certain elements of the original construct—specifically those dealing with extra-oral causes like sinus or tonsil issues—proved less relevant in the Thai context, suggesting that the cultural manifestation of this construct may lean more heavily toward social and interpersonal anxieties.

Validity

The validation framework for the T-HALT was comprehensive, incorporating multiple methodological tiers. Content and face validity were established through expert panels and target demographic feedback, ensuring the translated items resonated naturally with Thai speakers. To establish criterion validity, the researchers compared T-HALT scores against a self-reported measure of perceived Halitosis, yielding a robust positive correlation (r = 0.503). This confirms that the scale accurately captures the distress of those who believe they have bad breath.

Perhaps the most theoretically interesting finding emerged during discriminant validity testing. The researchers utilized an OralChroma device to objectively quantify volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs) in the participants' breath. The T-HALT scores showed no significant correlation with these objective gas levels (r = 0.071). Far from being a failure of the instrument, this elegantly demonstrates discriminant validity: the T-HALT measures the psychological and perceived impact of the condition, which operates independently of objective clinical severity due to phenomena like olfactory adaptation.

Convergent & Discriminant Validation Correlations

Reference Instrument Correlation Coefficient (r)
Self-perceived Halitosis scale r=0.503

Reliability

The T-HALT exhibits exceptional reliability, indicating that it measures its target construct with high precision and minimal error. Internal consistency was evaluated across different phases of the study, yielding Cronbach's alpha coefficients between 0.940 and 0.943. These values are well above the standard threshold of 0.70, suggesting excellent cohesion among the questionnaire items, though they are high enough to hint at potential item redundancy.

Temporal stability was also rigorously tested to ensure the instrument produces consistent results over time when the underlying condition has not changed. The test-retest reliability analysis produced an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) of 0.886. In psychometric terms, an ICC above 0.80 is considered highly robust, confirming that the T-HALT is a dependable tool for longitudinal studies or for tracking patient progress before and after clinical interventions.

Factor Analysis

To understand the latent structure of the T-HALT, the research team employed both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA). The EFA initially extracted a four-factor model, suggesting that the psychological burden of Halitosis in this population is not entirely monolithic but rather comprises distinct sub-domains of distress and functional limitation.

When this structure was subjected to the more rigorous CFA, the model generally held up, but item-level scrutiny revealed specific weaknesses. Notably, items 1 and 7 exhibited poor standardized factor loadings, meaning they did not contribute meaningfully to the latent variables they were supposed to measure. These items, which relate to less common external causes of Halitosis, were deemed psychometrically weak for this specific cultural group, leading to the recommendation that a modified, shorter version of the scale might offer superior model fit in future applications.

Instrument

Test Type Self-report questionnaire
Format Likert scale
Scoring Items are summed to create a total score, with higher scores indicating a more severe negative impact on Quality of life.
Language Thai
Population Adults, Clinical patients
Age Group 18-88 years
Administration Self-administered

Scoring & Interpretation Guidelines

Scoring Instructions Exclusion of items 1 and 7 is recommended for optimal factor structure based on CFA results.
Normative Reference Values Mean = 16.37 (SD = 15.10)

Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test Items

📋 Items are currently not available

The individual items of this scale are not publicly available. Researchers interested in using this instrument should contact the original authors directly to request the scale materials.

Sample

The validation sample comprised 200 adult dental patients (mean age = 48.55 years; 65% female) recruited via convenience sampling at the Dental Hospital of Mahidol University. Participants included individuals both with and without a history of Halitosis.

📄
Cite This Paper

Yodhathai Satravaha, Katkarn Thitiwatpalakarn, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Supatchai Boonpratham, Chaiyapol Chaweewannakorn, Kawin Sipiyaruk (2024). Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test. BMC oral health. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-024-04926-y

📄 Download Full-Text PDF

📚
References
57 references
  1. Akaji EA, Folaranmi N, Ashiwaju O. Halitosis: a review of the literature on its prevalence, impact and control. Oral Health Prev Dent. 2014;12(4):297–304.
  2. Deolia SG, Ali M, Bhatia S, Sen S. Psychosocial effects of Halitosis among young Adults. Ann Indian Psych. 2018;2:120–4. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/aip.aip_23_18
  3. Schertel Cassiano L, Abdullahi F, Leite FRM, López R, Peres MA, Nascimento GG. The association between Halitosis and oral-health-related Quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Periodontol. 2021;48(11):1458–69. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpe.13530
  4. Mento C, Lombardo C, Mariacristina M, Whithorn N, Boronat-Catalá M, Alminana-Pastor P, Fernàndez C, Bruno A, Muscatello M, Zoccali R. Adolescence, adulthood and self-perceived Halitosis: a role of psychological factors. Medicina. 2021;57:614. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina57060614
  5. Briceag R, Caraiane A, Raftu G, Horhat RM, Bogdan I, Fericean RM, Shaaban L, Popa M, Bumbu BA, Bratu ML, et al. Emotional and social impact of Halitosis on adolescents and young Adults: a systematic review. Med (Kaunas). 2023;59(3):564. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59030564
  6. Foo LH, Balan P, Pang LM, Laine ML, Seneviratne CJ. Role of the oral microbiome, metabolic pathways, and novel diagnostic tools in intra-oral Halitosis: a comprehensive update. Crit Rev Microbiol. 2021;47(3):359–75. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/1040841X.2021.1888867
  7. Aylıkcı BU, Colak H. Halitosis: from diagnosis to management. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2013;4(1):14–23. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-9668.107255
  8. Issitt T, Wiggins L, Veysey M, Sweeney ST, Brackenbury WJ, Redeker K. Volatile compounds in human breath: critical review and meta-analysis. J Breath Res. 2022;16(2):024001. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ac5230
  9. Lee Y-H, Shin S-I, Hong J-Y. Investigation of volatile sulfur compound level and Halitosis in patients with gingivitis and periodontitis. Sci Rep. 2023;13(1):13175. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-40391-3
  10. Pham TA. Comparison between self-estimated and clinical oral malodor. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013;71(1):263–70. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3109/00016357.2012.671363
  11. Olszewska-Czyz I, Sozkes S, Dudzik A. Clinical trial evaluating Quality of life in patients with intra-oral Halitosis. J Clin Med. 2022;11(2):326. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11020326
  12. Kizhner V, Xu D, Krespi YP. A new tool measuring oral malodor Quality of life. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;268(8):1227–32. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1518-x
  13. Dudzik A, Chomyszyn-Gajewska M, Łazarz-Bartyzel K. An evaluation of Halitosis using oral Chroma™ Data Manager, Organoleptic scores and patients’ subjective opinions. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7(3):6–11.
  14. Silveira JOD, Cota LOM, Bendo CB, Faria SFS, Costa FO. Validation of the Brazilian version of the Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test (HALT). Braz Oral Res. 2020;34:e098. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-3107bor-2020.vol34.0098
  15. Briceag R, Caraiane A, Raftu G, Bratu ML, Buzatu R, Dehelean L, Bondrescu M, Bratosin F, Bumbu BA. Validation of the Romanian version of the Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test (HALT) in a cross-sectional study among young Adults. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(19):2660. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11192660
  16. He SL, Wang JH, Wang MH, Deng YM. Validation of the Chinese version of the Halitosis Associated Life-quality test (HALT) questionnaire. Oral Dis. 2012;18(7):707–12. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-0825.2012.01929.x
  17. Krisdapong S, Prasertsom P, Rattanarangsima K, Sheiham A. Relationships between oral diseases and impacts on Thai schoolchildren’s Quality of life: evidence from a Thai national oral health survey of 12- and 15-year-olds. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012;40(6):550–9. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2012.00705.x
  18. Srisilapanan P, Korwanich N, Jienmaneechotchai S, Dalodom S, Veerachai N, Vejvitee W, Roseman J. Estimate of Impact on the oral health-related quality of life of older Thai people by the Provision of Dentures through the Royal Project. Int J Dent. 2016;2016(1):1976013.
  19. Kaewkamnerdpong I, Krisdapong S. Oral diseases associated with condition-specific oral health-related quality of life and school performance of Thai primary school children: a hierarchical approach. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2018;46(3):270–9. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/cdoe.12361
  20. Aboalshamat K, Farsi N, Merwass R, Alshubaili D, Filimban L. The impact of COVID-19 on Halitosis among the general population in Saudi Arabia: a potential Symptom. J Res Med Dent Sci. 2021;9(11):45–52.
  21. Qian XX. Enterogenous extra-oral Halitosis has a more severe impact on Quality of life in females compared to males. J Breath Res. 2024;18(2):026005. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ad2003
  22. Koch M, Lunde L-K, Gjulem T, Knardahl S, Veiersted KB. Validity of questionnaire and representativeness of objective methods for measurements of mechanical exposures in construction and health care work. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(9):e0162881. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0162881
  23. Elfil M, Negida A. Sampling methods in clinical research; an educational review. Emerg (Tehran). 2017;5(1):e52.
  24. Bujang MA, Baharum N. A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: a review. Archives Orofac Sci. 2017;12(1):1–11.
  25. Sundram S, Romli N. A pilot study to test the reliability and validity of the research instrument. Malaysian J Soc Sci Humanit (MJSSH). 2023;8(3):e002149-002149.
  26. Bujang MA, Omar ED, Foo DHP, Hon YK. Sample size determination for conducting a pilot study to assess reliability of a questionnaire. Restor Dent Endod. 2024;49(1):e3. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2024.49.e3
  27. Mundfrom DJ, Shaw DG, Ke TL. Minimum sample size recommendations for conducting factor analyses. Int J Test. 2005;5(2):159–68. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0502_4
  28. White M. Sample size in quantitative instrument validation studies: a systematic review of articles published in Scopus, 2021. Heliyon. 2022;8(12):e12223. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12223
  29. Schuster C, Hahn S, Ettlin T. Objectively-assessed outcome measures: a translation and cross-cultural adaptation procedure applied to the Chedoke McMaster Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:106. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-106
  30. Santiwong P, Sommaluan K, Mokkasak S, Rachuratchata C, Rattanaopas T, Sipiyaruk K. The implementation of PROMs/PREMs in the Assessment of Orthodontic Treatment outcomes: a Questionnaire Survey. J Int Soc Prev Community Dentistry. 2022;12(2):210–5. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_275_21
  31. Santiwong P, Dutsadeeviroj K, Potchanarungvakul K, Leartchotikul T, Jiwsiritrakul T, Sipiyaruk K. Significance of non-statistically significant results in the prediction of oral health-related quality of life in Orthodontic patients: a survey using two linking questionnaires. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(8):5446. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20085446
  32. Buajeeb W, Chokpipatkun J, Achalanan N, Kriwattanawong N, Sipiyaruk K. The development of an online serious game for oral diagnosis and treatment planning: evaluation of knowledge acquisition and retention. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):830. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04789-x
  33. Teerawongpairoj C, Tantipoj C, Sipiyaruk K. The design and evaluation of gamified online role-play as a telehealth training strategy in dental education: an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):9216. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58425-9
  34. Noble S, Scheinost D, Constable RT. A decade of test-retest reliability of functional connectivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. NeuroImage. 2019;203:116157. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116157
  35. Goncalves WSF, Byrne R, de Lira PIC, Viana MT, Trost SG. Psychometric properties of instruments to measure parenting practices and children’s movement behaviors in low-income families from Brazil. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2021;21(1):129. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01320-y
  36. Mason J, Classen S, Wersal J, Sisiopiku VP. Establishing face and content validity of a survey to assess users’ perceptions of automated vehicles. Transp Res Rec. 2020;2674(9):538–47. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120930225
  37. Masuwai A, Zulkifli H, Hamzah M. Evaluation of content validity and face validity of secondary school Islamic education teacher self-assessment instrument. Cogent Educ. 2024;11(1):2308410. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2308410
  38. Yan W, Chen Q, Zhang X, Elovainio M, Huang Y. The Chinese version of attitudes towards guidelines scale: validity and reliability assessment. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19(1):40. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0682-3
  39. Falcão DP, Vieira CN, Batista de Amorim RF. Breaking paradigms: a new definition for Halitosis in the context of pseudo-Halitosis and halitophobia. J Breath Res. 2012;6(1):017105. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7155/6/1/017105
  40. Rönkkö M, Cho E. An updated guideline for assessing discriminant validity. Organ Res Methods. 2022;25(1):6–14. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120968614
  41. Yong AG, Pearce S. A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials Quant Methods Psychol. 2013;9(2):79–94. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.09.2.p079
  42. Mardia KV, Kent JT, Taylor CC. Multivariate analysis. 2nd ed. West Sussex: Wiley; 2024.
  43. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis. 8th ed. Hampshire: Cengage; 2019.
  44. Guadagnoli E, Velicer WF. Relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychol Bull. 1988;103(2):265. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.2.265
  45. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39–50. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
  46. Hair JF Jr, Sarstedt M, Hopkins L, Kuppelwieser VG. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): an emerging tool in business research. Eur Bus Rev. 2014;26(2):106–21. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
  47. Taherdoost H. Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how to test the validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a research. Int J Acad Res Manage. 2016;5:28–36.
  48. Fitzner K. Reliability and validity a quick review. Diabetes Educ. 2007;33(5):775–80. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721707308172
  49. Ahmed I, Ishtiaq S. Reliability and validity: importance in medical research. J Pak Med Assoc. 2021;71(10):2401–6.
  50. Locker D, Allen F. What do measures of ‘oral health-related quality of life’ measure? Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35(6):401–11. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00418.x
  51. Scully C, Greenman J. Halitosis (breath odor). Periodontol 2000. 2008;48(1):66–75. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00266.x
  52. Estabrooks CA, Squires JE, Hayduk LA, Cummings GG, Norton PG. Advancing the argument for validity of the Alberta Context Tool with healthcare aides in residential long-term care. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):107. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-107
  53. Aydin M, Harvey-Woodworth CN. Halitosis: a new definition and classification. Br Dent J. 2014;217(1):E1. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2014.552
  54. Dos Santos DDL, Besegato JF, Vieira SM, Rached Dantas AA, Silva AM, da Silva AM. Effect of fixed orthodontic appliances on self-assessment and diagnosis of Halitosis in undergraduate dental students. J Indian Soc Periodontol. 2021;25(5):432–7. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.4103/jisp.jisp_327_20
  55. Stuck BA, Fadel V, Hummel T, Sommer JU. Subjective olfactory desensitization and recovery in humans. Chem Senses. 2014;39(2):151–7. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjt064
  56. John MT. Foundations of oral health-related quality of life. J Rehabil. 2021;48(3):355–9. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13040
  57. Valdez D, Montenegro MS, Crawford BL, Turner RC, Lo W-J, Jozkowski KN. Translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches as a component of health research and practice: a discussion and taxonomy of popular translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches. Soc Sci Med. 2021;278:113931. 🔗 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113931

Cite this article

Mohammed looti (2026). Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Retrieved from https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/thai-halitosis-associated-life-quality-test/

Mohammed looti. "Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 13 Aug. 2026, https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/thai-halitosis-associated-life-quality-test/.

Mohammed looti. "Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test." PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, 2026. https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/thai-halitosis-associated-life-quality-test/.

Mohammed looti (2026) 'Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test', PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. Available at: https://scales.arabpsychology.com/s/thai-halitosis-associated-life-quality-test/.

[1] Mohammed looti, "Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test," PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES, vol. X, no. Y, ص Z-Z, August, 2026.

Mohammed looti. Thai Halitosis Associated Life-Quality Test. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCALES. 2026;vol(issue):pages.

Related terms:

  1. Assessment of Quality of Life Instrument (AQoL)
  2. EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire QLQ-C30
  3. Flanagan`s Quality of Life Scale (QOLS)
  4. WHO Quality of Life Scale
  5. WHO Quality of Life Scale
  6. World Health Organisation Quality of Life (Brief version)
  7. Family Quality of Life Questionnaire-Patient with Cancer
  8. The Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC) scale
  9. Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life-19 items
  10. Parkinson’s Disease Quality of Life questionnaire
× Figure
PDF
Scroll to Top