evidencegaps
Primary study · included by 1 review

Caries risk profiles in schoolchildren over 2 years assessed by Cariogram.

Hansel Petersson 2010 · Petersson Gunnel Hänsel, Isberg Per-Erik, Twetman Svante · International journal of paediatric dentistry · 2010

PubMed 20642470doi:10.1111/j.1365-263x.2010.01064.xJournal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Trial PICO

Not extracted yet. Trial-level population, intervention, comparator, outcomes and design will appear here after the trial extraction run. Until then, the reviews below describe the study.

Results

Not extracted yet. Per-trial results (events, means, effect and weight as each review's forest plot reports them) will appear here after the trial extraction run.

Included by

Multivariable prediction models of caries increment: a systematic review and critical appraisal.
Non-Cochrane · prognostic · 2023 · cited as Hansel Petersson 2010 · Table 1 & Table 2 [31]; model validation, coronal caries; Cariogram validation (Fig. 6, P3-O1)
Outcome this study informsPooled effectEvidenceCertainty
Predictive performance for coronal caries increment (positive likelihood ratio, LR+)
Multivariable prediction model of caries increment (>=3 predictors), e.g. logistic-regression or algorithm-based caries-risk models vs Alternative prediction model(s) within the same study, or no formal comparator (models compared descriptively; no between-model statistical test) · Follow-up >=1 year (included studies 1-5 years)
No meta-analysis. Per-model LR+ (Table 2) across the 9 validation studies (31 coronal models) ranged roughly 0.78-5.53 (e.g. Beck 1.62-3.00, Christian/CAMBRA 1.09-1.14, Gao 2013 CAT ~1.03 to NUS-CRA 5.31, Campus 5.53,…9 studiesUngraded
Predictive performance for coronal caries increment (negative likelihood ratio, LR-)
Multivariable prediction model of caries increment (>=3 predictors), e.g. logistic-regression or algorithm-based caries-risk models vs Alternative prediction model(s) within the same study, or no formal comparator (models compared descriptively; no between-model statistical test) · Follow-up >=1 year (included studies 1-5 years)
No meta-analysis. Per-model LR- (Table 2) across the 9 validation studies ranged from about 0.14 to 1.13 (e.g. Gao 2013 NUS-CRA 0.26, CAMBRA 0.14-0.31, CAT up to ~1.10; Campus 0.20; Pang 2020 low-risk 1.13). Overall…9 studiesUngraded

1 including review in total.