Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Current techniques for measuring dental fluorosis: issues in data analysis

A Kingman1

  • 1Epidemiology & Oral Diseases Prevention Program, National Institute of Dental Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20816.

Advances in Dental Research
|June 1, 1994
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Erratum.

Journal of periodontology·2018
Same author

Oral health care services utilisation in the adult US population: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey 2006.

Community dental health·2013
Same author

Transmission filter for the extreme ultraviolet spectral region composed of a thin Saran (C(2)H(2)Cl(2)) foil.

Applied optics·2010
Same author

Peptide-based ELISAs are not sensitive and specific enough to detect muscarinic receptor type 3 autoantibodies in serum from patients with Sjogren's syndrome.

Annals of the rheumatic diseases·2010
Same author

This Is No Myth.

Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)·2009
Same author

Analysis of clinical trials involving non-cavitated caries lesions.

Journal of dental research·2004
Same journal

Institutional Patriarchy, Gender Barriers, and Nigeria's Oral Health Workforce.

Advances in dental research·2025
Same journal

Sex, Gender and Sexuality in Oral Health Research: Setting the Scene.

Advances in dental research·2025
Same journal

Beyond Demographics: Sex, Gender, and Sexuality in Oral Health Research.

Advances in dental research·2025
Same journal

Conceptualisations of Sex and Gender in Oral Health Research.

Advances in dental research·2025
Same journal

Analysing the Interaction of Sex and Laboratory Conditions in Animal Research.

Advances in dental research·2025
Same journal

Advancing Oral Health Workforce Equity in Gender and Sexual Orientation.

Advances in dental research·2025
See all related articles

Current dental fluorosis diagnostic tools lack standardization, leading to inconsistent prevalence data. Using relative measures like odds ratios offers a more stable comparison across different scoring systems and fluoride exposure levels.

Area of Science:

  • Dental Public Health
  • Epidemiology
  • Fluoride Research

Background:

  • Popular dental fluorosis scoring systems exhibit variability in measurement units, site evaluation, and symptom classification.
  • This heterogeneity results in significant discrepancies in population fluorosis prevalence estimates.
  • Intrinsic system factors, such as questionable categories and case definitions, further complicate interpretation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To address the inconsistencies in dental fluorosis diagnosis and prevalence estimation.
  • To explore methods for improving the comparability and interpretability of fluorosis scores.
  • To investigate the utility of relative measures for understanding fluorosis severity across different fluoride exposure levels.

Main Methods:

  • Comparative analysis of existing dental fluorosis scoring systems.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Evaluation of the impact of different measurement units and case definitions on prevalence data.
  • Assessment of the correlation between extent and severity measures within Dean's Index (DI) and Tooth Surface Index of Fluorosis (TSIF).
  • Utilizing odds ratios to compare fluorosis prevalence between groups with varying fluoride exposure.

    • Main Results:

    • Significant variations in fluorosis prevalence are observed due to differences in scoring systems.
    • Strong correlations exist between the extent and severity of fluorosis within DI and TSIF.
    • Parallel patterns in fluorosis severity are evident across different fluoride exposure groups.
    • Relative measures, such as odds ratios, demonstrate greater stability in comparisons between scoring systems.

    Conclusions:

    • Standardization of dental fluorosis diagnostic criteria is crucial for accurate prevalence assessment.
    • Relative measures of fluorosis prevalence provide a more reliable method for comparing populations with differing fluoride exposures.
    • Understanding fluorosis severity is enhanced by employing relative comparisons over absolute differences.