Premium
Classifying periodontitis among adolescents: implications for epidemiological research
Author(s) -
Lopez Rodrigo,
Baelum Vibeke
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
community dentistry and oral epidemiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.061
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1600-0528
pISSN - 0301-5661
DOI - 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2003.00022.x
Subject(s) - epidemiology , medicine , logistic regression , periodontitis , multivariable calculus , epidemiological method , risk factor , population , clinical attachment loss , statistics , dentistry , pathology , environmental health , mathematics , control engineering , engineering
– Objectives: To evaluate the performance of four clinical classification systems proposed for periodontitis in young subjects when applied to epidemiological data on clinical attachment loss. We assess the extent to which the use of different case definition systems may influence the outcome of descriptive and analytical epidemiological studies. Methods: The data originate in a screening examination for periodontitis carried out among 9162 high school students. Each of four previously published classification systems was applied to the data. The prevalence of cases according to each system was estimated and the association between case status, as defined by each system, and a set of candidate determinant variables was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results: The four classification systems yielded rather different prevalence estimates. For localized periodontitis the estimates varied by a factor of 10, and for generalized periodontitis, these varied by a factor of 30. The results of the logistic regression analyses using the different case‐definitions essentially confirmed the results of a population‐based analysis. However, the precision of the estimates decreased with decreasing numbers of cases identified by the classification systems. Conclusions: From an epidemiological point of view there is little justification for the use of the complicated classification systems. An approach based on the simple definition of a case as a person with clinical attachment loss, e.g. ≥3 mm, is preferable.