Co-occurrence of dental caries and periodontitis: multilevel modelling approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous studies reported varyingly positive, negative, or no relationships between caries and periodontitis. Therefore, the aim was to assess the potential co-occurrence of caries experience and periodontal inflammation on the same teeth. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from the Lithuanian National Oral Health Survey. The study included a stratified random sample of 1405 individuals aged 34-78, recruited from 5 Lithuanian cities and 10 peri-urban/rural areas (response rate 52%). Information about sociodemographic (age, sex, education, residence), behavioral (sugar-containing diet, tooth brushing frequency, use of interdental care products, last dental visit, smoking) and biological (systemic disease, use of medication and xerostomia) determinants was collected using the World Health Organization (WHO) Oral Health Questionnaire for Adults supplemented with additional questions. Clinical data were recorded using the WHO criteria and collected by one trained and calibrated examiner. Dental caries status was recorded as sound, decayed, missing, filled surfaces. Subsequently for the analyses, status was recorded at a tooth-level as decayed- and filled-teeth (DT and FT) including proximal, buccal, and oral surfaces. Two measures were used for periodontal status. The probing pocket depth (PPD) was measured at six sites and recorded at a tooth level into the absence of PPD or presence of PPD ≥ 4 mm. Bleeding on probing (BOP) was measured at the same six sites and was recorded as either present or absent at a tooth-level. Univariable and multivariable 2-level random intercept binary logistic regression analyses were utilized. RESULTS: Positive associations were found between DT and BOP (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20-1.67), FT and BOP (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.82-2.23), DT and PPD (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.15-1.67) and FT and PPD (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.83-2.20). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings add evidence for the co-occurrence of periodontal inflammation and caries on the same teeth. This suggests the need for increased emphasis on a transdisciplinary approach in designing oral health interventions that target dental caries and periodontal disease simultaneously. In addition, longitudinal studies exploring the co-occurrence of caries and periodontal disease at the same sites, taking into consideration the levels of both conditions and genetic variation, are warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".