ADR Sign up for ETOC alerts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kingman, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kingman, A.

Advances in Dental Research, Vol 8, 56-65, Copyright © 1994 by International & American Associations for Dental Research

ARTICLES

Current techniques for measuring dental fluorosis: issues in data analysis

A. Kingman
Epidemiology & Oral Diseases Prevention Program, National Institute of Dental Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20816.

The currently popular scoring systems used to diagnosis fluorosis use different measurement units, evaluate variable numbers of sites per person, and involve non-comparable groupings of clinical symptoms. Although none of these factors is related to the level of fluoride exposure in the examined population, their combined effect produces fluorosis prevalence values for a population which vary considerably among and within these scoring systems. Intrinsic factors for a scoring system include the inclusion of a questionable category, the minimal level of fluorotic involvement, and the number of affected sites within a subject required for case definition. Thus, a case definition of fluorosis for each scoring system, although not mandatory, would certainly be desirable so that dental epidemiologists and clinical investigators can interpret fluorosis scores relative to risk assessment. On the other hand, ratios of fluorosis prevalence magnitudes, as evidenced by odds ratios, can be more stable between scoring systems when groups with different fluoride exposure levels are compared. There is a strong correlation between extent and specific measures of fluorosis severity for Dean's Index (DI) and the Tooth Surface Index of Fluorosis (TSIF) scoring system, as well as within each scoring system separately. Parallel patterns in fluorosis severity were found among groups with different fluoride exposure on severity levels of fluorosis may be better understood by using relative measures rather than by using differences in severity levels.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
W. H. BOWEN
Fluorosis: Is it really a problem?
J Am Dent Assoc, October 1, 2002; 133(10): 1405 - 1407.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 1994 Institutional Access Guidelines