Dataset Information

Definitions used for a healthy periodontium-A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To investigate the explicitness and variability of the definition of periodontal health in the current scientific literature.

Material and methods

The authors conducted a systematic literature review using PubMed and CENTRAL (2013-01/2019-05) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the guidelines of the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement.

Results

A total of 51 papers met the predefined inclusion criteria. Of these, 13 papers did not report any explicit definitions of periodontal health. Out of the 38 remaining articles, half of them used a reference to support their definition and half of them not. The studies published in periodontics-related journals or those that scored a low risk of bias for the methodical quality presented more explicit and valid definitions. Probing pocket depth was the most frequently used individual parameter for defining periodontal health. However, there were substantial variations in the methods of measurement and cut-off values.

Conclusions

Given the diversity of periodontal health definitions, a cross-study comparison is difficult. The results of this review may be useful in making others aware of the significance of standardizing the definition of a healthy periodontium.

SUBMITTER: Li A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7687205 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Definitions used for a healthy periodontium-A systematic review.

Li An A Thomas Renske Z RZ van der Sluis Luc L Tjakkes Geerten-Has GH Slot Dagmar Else DE

International journal of dental hygiene 20200524 4

<h4>Objective</h4>To investigate the explicitness and variability of the definition of periodontal health in the current scientific literature.<h4>Material and methods</h4>The authors conducted a systematic literature review using PubMed and CENTRAL (2013-01/2019-05) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the guidelines of the Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 51 ...[more]

PMID: 32330350

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMajor adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) are increasingly used as composite outcomes in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. However, it is unclear how observational studies most commonly define MACE in the literature when using administrative data.MethodsWe identified peer-reviewed articles published in MEDLINE and EMBASE between January 1, 2010 to October 9, 2020. Studies utilizing administrative data to assess the MACE composite outcome using International Classification of Diseases 9th or 10th Revision diagnosis codes were included. Reviews, abstracts, and studies not providing outcome code definitions were excluded. Data extracted included data source, timeframe, MACE components, code definitions, code positions, and outcome validation.ResultsA total of 920 articles were screened, 412 were retained for full-text review, and 58 were included. Only 8.6% (n = 5/58) matched the traditional three-point MACE RCT definition of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, or cardiovascular death. None matched four-point (+unstable angina) or five-point MACE (+unstable angina and heart failure). The most common MACE components were: AMI and stroke, 15.5% (n = 9/58); AMI, stroke, and all-cause death, 13.8% (n = 8/58); and AMI, stroke and cardiovascular death 8.6% (n = 5/58). Further, 67% (n = 39/58) did not validate outcomes or cite validation studies. Additionally, 70.7% (n = 41/58) did not report code positions of endpoints, 20.7% (n = 12/58) used the primary position, and 8.6% (n = 5/58) used any position.ConclusionsComponents of MACE endpoints and diagnostic codes used varied widely across observational studies. Variability in the MACE definitions used and information reported across observational studies prohibit the comparison, replication, and aggregation of findings. Studies should transparently report the administrative codes used and code positions, as well as utilize validated outcome definitions when possible.

Project description:BackgroundHealthy ageing (HA) has been defined using multiple approaches. We aim to produce a comprehensive overview and analysis of the theoretical models underpinning this concept and its associated normative terms and definitions.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed HA models in Embase.com, Medline (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science until August 2022. Original theoretical papers, concept analyses, and reviews that proposed new models were included. Operational models/definitions, development psychology theories and mechanisms of ageing were excluded. We followed an iterative approach to extract the models' characteristics and thematically analyze them based on the approach of Walker and Avant. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021238796).FindingsOut of 10,741 records, we included 59 papers comprising 65 models/definitions, published in English (1960-2022) from 16 countries in Europe, Asia, and America. Human ageing was described using 12 normative terms, mainly (models (%)): successful (34 (52%)), healthy (eight (12%)), well (five (8%)), and active (four (6%)). We identified intrinsic/extrinsic factors interacting throughout the life course, adaptive processes as attributes, and outcomes describing ageing patterns across objective and subjective dimensions (number of models/definitions): cognitive (62), psychological (53), physical (49), social (49), environmental (19), spiritual (16), economic (13), cultural (eight), political (six), and demographic (four) dimensions. Three types of models emerged: health-state outcomes (three), adaptations across the life course (31), or a combination of both (31). Two additional sub-classifications emphasized person-environment congruence and health promotion.InterpretationHA conceptualizations highlight its multidimensionality and complexity that renders a monistic model/definition challenging. It has become evident that life long person-environment interactions, adaptations, environments, and health promotion/empowerment are essential for HA. Our model classification provides a basis for harmonizing terms and dimensions that can guide research and comparisons of empirical findings, and inform social and health policies enabling HA for various populations and contexts.FundingMM, ZMRD, and OI are supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant No 801076, and MM is also supported by the Swiss National Foundation grant No 189235.

Project description:Bacterial invasion of the periodontal tissues has been suggested as a relevant step in the etiopathogenesis of periodontal disease. However, its exact importance remains to be defined. The present systematic review assessed the scientific evidence concerning the relationship between the quality or quantity of periodontal microbiota in periodontal tissues and development of periodontal disease. The databases Medline-PubMed, Cochrane-CENTRAL, ISI Web of Knowledge and SCOPUS were searched, up to January 2014. Studies that reported evaluation of periodontal pathogens invasion on human tissues were selected. The screening of 440 title/abstracts elected 26 papers for full-text reading. Twenty three papers were subsequently excluded because of insufficient data or a study protocol not related to the objectives of this systematic review. All included studies were case-control studies that evaluated intracellular or adherent bacteria to epithelial cells from periodontal pockets versus healthy sulci. Study protocols presented heterogeneity regarding case and control definitions and methodological approaches for microbial identification. No consistent significant differences were found related to the presence/absence or proportion of specific periopathogens across the studies, as only one study found statistically significant differences regarding the presence of A. actinomycetemcomitans (p = 0.043), T. forsythia (P < 0.001), P. intermedia (P < 0.001), C. ochracea (P < 0.001) and C. rectus (P = 0.003) in epithelial cells from periodontal pockets vs. healthy sulci. All studies reported a larger unspecific bacterial load in or on the epithelial cells taken from a diseased site compared to a healthy sulcus. The current available data is of low to moderate quality and inconsistent mainly due to study design, poor reporting and methodological diversity. As so, there is insufficient evidence to support or exclude the invasion by periodontal pathogens as a key step in the etiopathogenesis of periodontal disease. Further research is needed.

Dataset Information

Definitions used for a healthy periodontium-A systematic review.

Objective

Material and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Definitions used for a healthy periodontium-A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets