ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Optimal Examination Sites for Periodontal Disease Evaluation: Applying the Item Response Theory Graded Response Model.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Data-driven Age-related Macular Degeneration Severity Scoring System Leveraging the AREDS Studies and Clinical Electronic Medical Records.Ophthalmology · 2025Observational
- Impact of Depressive Disorder on Periodontal Status: A Comparative Study.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Estimating Periodontitis and Its Risk Association Using Partial-Mouth Recordings for Surveillance Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of dentistry · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Periodontal examination data have a complex structure. For epidemiological studies, mass screenings, and public health use, a simple index that represents the periodontal condition is necessary. Periodontal indices for partial examination of selected teeth have been developed. However, the selected teeth vary between indices, and a justification for the selection of examination teeth has not been presented. We applied a graded response model based on the item response theory to select optimal examination teeth and sites that represent periodontal conditions. Data were obtained from 254 patients who participated in a multicenter follow-up study. Baseline data were obtained from initial follow-up. Optimal examination sites were selected using item information calculated by graded response modeling. Twelve sites-maxillary 2nd premolar (palatal-medial), 1st premolar (palatal-distal), canine (palatal-medial), lateral incisor (palatal-central), central incisor (palatal-distal) and mandibular 1st premolar (lingual, medial)-were selected. Mean values for clinical attachment level, probing pocket depth, and bleeding on probing by full mouth examinations were used for objective variables. Measuring the clinical parameters of these sites can predict the results of full mouth examination. For calculating the periodontal index by partial oral examination, a justification for the selection of examination sites is essential. This study presents an evidence-based partial examination methodology and its modeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.