ArticleInternational dental journal2023
Validity of Simple Self-Reported Periodontal Status Questions.
Article in International dental journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Self-Reported Questionnaires for Detecting Periodontitis Across Multiple Cultures and Geographic Locations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2025Pooled it
- Associations Between Socioeconomic, Spatial and Educational Factors and Midlife Periodontal Disease Risk: Evidence From 'High School and Beyond'.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2025Article
- Association of periodontitis, tooth loss, and self-rated oral health with circadian syndrome in US adults: a cross-sectional population study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- The association between interdental cleaning and periodontitis in an urban Thai adult cohort: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this research was to evaluate the validity of the questions developed by Thai periodontists on self-reported periodontal status and symptoms in identifying severe periodontitis amongst adults in Thailand.
methodsRegistered Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) employees completed medical examinations and full-mouth periodontal examinations. They also were interviewed using a self-reported questionnaire that was developed by Thai periodontists. The questions pertained to their periodontal status and symptoms comprising swollen gums, bad breath, loose teeth, bleeding on brushing, painful gums, and pus or abscesses. The participants were categorised as having nonsevere and severe periodontitis according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in partnership with the American Academy of Periodontology (CDC/AAP) case definitions. Self-reported periodontal status and symptom results were compared with actual periodontal status. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were calculated.
resultsA total of 1393 EGAT employees participated in this study. The questions on self-reported periodontal status and all symptoms poorly identified patients with severe periodontitis, with an AUROCC of 0.52 to 0.60. The sensitivity was 5.0% to 40.2%; however, the specificity was good, at 73.2% to 99.1%. The validity of the self-reported questions was comparable amongst the sex, education, and income subgroups.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that self-reported periodontal status and symptoms were inadequate in identifying patients with severe periodontal disease.
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.