Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Advances in Dental Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
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.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?
Adv Dent Res 8:56-65, June, 1994
© 1994 SAGE Publications

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 exposures for the DI and TSIF scoring systems. The effects of fluoride exposure on severity levels of fluorosis may be better understood by using relative measures rather than by using differences in severity levels.

Advances in Dental Research, Vol. 8, No. 1, 56-65 (1994)
DOI: 10.1177/08959374940080011101
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


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]