ArticleScientific reports2026
A selective machine learning algorithm for severe periodontitis labeling from questionnaire data.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Epidemiological cohorts often collect self-reported oral health (SROH) questionnaires but lack clinical periodontal measurements. We developed a selective, explainable machine learning (ML) pipeline that can assign labels for severe periodontitis (SP) or no periodontitis (NP). Three datasets (n = 498) with SROH questionnaires, demographics, and Community Periodontal Index of Treatment Needs (CPITN) scores were used to derive NP, moderate periodontitis (MP), and SP categories. MP cases were excluded from model development. After cleaning and feature engineering, non-similar label duplicates were removed. A CatBoost model (Separator-A) was trained with tenfold cross-validation; NP/SP predictions were retained when probability ≥ 0.85. From these outputs and domain rules, a rule-consistent subset was created to train a second model (Separator-Z). Performance was evaluated on internal test and hold-out inference sets. Next, the pipeline was applied to MP cases. The pipeline achieved complete separation across all evaluation sets within the retained high-confidence subset, which represented 4.31% of eligible NP/SP cases, while no MP cases were misclassified as NP or SP. Thus, a two-stage, explainable ML pipeline can selectively identify SP and NP from SROH questionnaire data, supporting case-control selection in cohorts without clinical periodontal examinations, though validation is warranted to confirm generalizability.
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.