SynthesisJournal of clinical periodontology2025
Diagnostic Accuracy of Self-Reported Questionnaires for Detecting Periodontitis Across Multiple Cultures and Geographic Locations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical periodontology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- 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
- An oral health module for use in noncommunicable disease risk factor surveys.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2026Article
- Self-Reported Periodontal Symptoms and Clinical Periodontal Status in Older Adults With and Without Dementia: A Population-Based Diagnostic Accuracy Study.Journal of clinical periodontology · 2026Article
- Periodontal Disease Burden in China and G20 Nations: Insights From the Global Burden of Disease 2023 Study.International dental journal · 2026Article
- aMMP-8 self-testing and self-administered questionnaires for periodontitis screening: A diagnostic trial in a Chinese population.Journal of periodontology · 2026Article
- Oral Health, Inflammation, and the Burden of Multiple Long-Term Conditions: Cross-Sectional Analyses from UK Biobank and NHANES.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate self-reported questionnaires' intrinsic validity and diagnostic accuracy for detecting periodontitis across diverse cultural and geographic contexts. MATERIALS AND
methodsElectronic searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library until 4 March 2025. Studies included those using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Periodontology (CDC/AAP) criteria or the 2017 World Workshop classifications as reference standards and reporting the diagnostic accuracy of self-reported questionnaire items. The validity of the eight-item questionnaire developed by the CDC/AAP was assessed by analysing the proportion of answers, and bias was evaluated using the QUADAS-2 tool. Owing to the limited number of studies using the 2017 World Workshop classifications, the quantitative synthesis was restricted to those using the CDC/AAP criteria. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for total periodontitis (including mild, moderate and severe cases), moderate-to-severe periodontitis and severe periodontitis.
resultsTotally, 23 studies (from 22 articles) were included in the systematic review, with 16 studies (from 15 articles) eligible for meta-analysis. The 'Don't know/Refused' option across the eight items of the CDC/AAP questionnaire ranged from 0% to 46.1%, indicating variable comprehension of certain items. Pooled sensitivity and specificity across the questionnaire items ranged from 17% to 82% and from 23% to 97%, respectively. DOR varied from 0.75 (95% CI: 0.54-1.03) to 8.01 (95% CI: 2.33-27.45). Significant heterogeneity was observed for most questions.
conclusionsSelf-reported questionnaires show potential for monitoring periodontitis but face issues with sensitivity and cross-cultural validity. Future research should focus on culturally adaptive designs and standardised validation protocols to enhance diagnostic accuracy and improve their effectiveness in global periodontal health screening.
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.