ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Identifying subtypes of functional dentition in older adults: a population-based regression and latent class analysis.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to explore the latent factors associated to functional dentition (FD), quantify their clustering across probability levels, and derive precision prevention strategies. MATERIALS AND
methodsA cross-sectional study of 423 adults aged 65-74 were conducted using data from a 2021 national surveillance project in China. After preliminary selection of potential variables through multivariable logistic regression, latent class analysis (LCA) was performed in R. Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and entropy determined the optimal number of latent classes. Bootstrap resampling and a confusion matrix assessed model performance.
resultsParticipants were classified into a low-probability group (Class 1, N = 136, 32.2%) and a high-probability group (Class 2, N = 287, 67.8%), representing the best fit (AIC = 2700.36, BIC = 2744.88, Entropy = 0.733). Compared to Class 2, Class 1 exhibited lower toothbrushing frequency and oral health knowledge level, but higher proportions of root caries, AL > 5 mm, and unrestored tooth loss. The model showed good stability (average agreement rate = 0.867) and strong predictive performance (Kappa = 0.806, Accuracy = 0.915, Sensitivity = 0.862, Specificity = 0.940, Precision = 0.875, F1-score = 0.869).
conclusionsLCA identified distinct subgroups at varying FD probability and quantified clustered associated factors, supporting the accurate identification of high-risk populations and the development of targeted prevention strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41182421What 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.