Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHøvik, Hedda
dc.contributor.authorKolberg, Marit
dc.contributor.authorGjøra, Linda
dc.contributor.authorNymoen, Line Cathrine
dc.contributor.authorSkudutyte-Rysstad, Rasa
dc.contributor.authorHove, Lene Hystad
dc.contributor.authorSun, Yi-Qian
dc.contributor.authorNatland Fagerhaug, Tone
dc.date.accessioned2023-02-07T11:24:59Z
dc.date.available2023-02-07T11:24:59Z
dc.date.created2022-03-28T10:48:49Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn1472-6831
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/3048842
dc.description.abstractBackground Number of teeth is an established indicator of oral health and is commonly self-reported in epidemiological studies due to the costly and labor-intensive nature of clinical examinations. Although previous studies have found self-reported number of teeth to be a reasonably accurate measure, its accuracy among older adults ≥ 70 years is less explored. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of self-reported number of teeth and edentulousness in older adults and to investigate factors that may affect the accuracy of self-reports. Methods This study included two different samples of older adults ≥ 70 years drawn from the fourth wave of the Trøndelag Health Study (the HUNT Study), Norway. Sample 1 (n = 586) was used to evaluate the validity of self-reported number of teeth and sample 2 (n = 518) was used to evaluate self-reported edentulousness. Information on number of teeth and background variables (education, smoking, cognitive function, and self-perceived general and oral health) were self-reported in questionnaires, while clinical oral health examinations assessed number of teeth, number of teeth restored or replaced by fixed prosthodontics and edentulousness. Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients, Bland–Altman plot, chi-square test and kappa statistics were used to assess the agreement between self-reported and clinically recorded number of teeth. Results The mean difference between self-reported and clinically recorded number of teeth was low (− 0.22 teeth), and more than 70% of the participants reported their number of teeth within an error of two teeth. Correlations between self-reports and clinical examinations were high for the total sample (0.86 (Spearman) and 0.91 (Pearson)). However, a lower correlation was found among participants with dementia (0.74 (Spearman) and 0.85 (Pearson)), participants having ≥ 20 teeth (0.76 (Spearman) and 0.67 (Pearson)), and participants with ≥ 5 teeth restored or replaced by fixed prosthodontics (0.75 (Spearman) and 0.77 (Pearson)). Self-reports of having teeth or being edentulous were correct in 96.3% of the cases (kappa value 0.93, p value < 0.001).en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBMCen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleThe validity of self-reported number of teeth and edentulousness among Norwegian older adults, the HUNT Studyen_US
dc.title.alternativeThe validity of self-reported number of teeth and edentulousness among Norwegian older adults, the HUNT Studyen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.source.volume22en_US
dc.source.journalBMC Oral Healthen_US
dc.source.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12903-022-02116-2
dc.identifier.cristin2012934
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode2


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal