The RCI Revisited after 15 Years: Used, Reinvented, Modified, Debated, and Natural Logged

Katz, Ralph V.

doi:10.1111/j.1752-7325.1996.tb02391.x

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The RCI has been reported as a strong measure of disease severity [Katz, 1996;Du et al, 2009], and our study confirms that it can be utilized as a predictor of disease incidence in a risk model. Baseline RC is a frequently tested risk indicator of RC incidence.…”

Section: Root Caries Predictionsupporting

confidence: 59%

A Predictive Model for Root Caries Incidence

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to find the set of risk indicators best able to predict root caries (RC) incidence in caries-active adults utilizing data from the Xylitol for Adult Caries Trial (X-ACT). Five logistic regression models were compared with respect to their predictive performance for incident RC using data from placebo-control participants with exposed root surfaces at baseline and from two study centers with ancillary data collection (n = 155). Prediction performance was assessed from baseline variables and after including ancillary variables [smoking, diet, use of removable partial dentures (RPD), toothbrush use, income, education, and dental insurance]. A sensitivity analysis added treatment to the models for both the control and treatment participants (n = 301) to predict RC for the control participants. Forty-nine percent of the control participants had incident RC. The model including the number of follow-up years at risk, the number of root surfaces at risk, RC index, gender, race, age, and smoking resulted in the best prediction performance, having the highest AUC and lowest Brier score. The sensitivity analysis supported the primary analysis and gave slightly better performance summary measures. The set of risk indicators best able to predict RC incidence included an increased number of root surfaces at risk and increased RC index at baseline, followed by white race and nonsmoking, which were strong nonsignificant predictors. Gender, age, and increased number of follow-up years at risk, while included in the model, were also not statistically significant. The inclusion of health, diet, RPD use, toothbrush use, income, education, and dental insurance variables did not improve the prediction performance.

show abstract

Section: Root Caries Predictionsupporting

confidence: 59%

A Predictive Model for Root Caries Incidence

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even though observational cohort studies such as the FDCS do have less inferential power than randomized controlled clinical trials, they nonetheless offer the important advantages of using a sample that is representative of a defined population, they include persons regardless of whether they actually seek dental care, and they monitor change due to dental care that is provided in 'realworld' private practice settings where the overwhelming majority of dental care is delivered [Guess et al, 1995;Gilbert et al, 1998a]. We also remind the reader that subgingival root surfaces were not assessed for root caries, which may have caused an underestimate of root caries incidence [Burt et al, 1986;Locker et al, 1989;Katz, 1996].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because only the worst site was recorded for each tooth, rather than for each tooth site, root caries incidence is reported herein at the person level, not with regard to the number of root surfaces actually exposed to the oral environment by attachment loss. This precluded a report of the root caries index [Katz, 1996], which is an acknowledged limitation. Examinations were conducted at central facilities in the community or in participants' homes.…”

Section: Clinical Examination Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Twenty–Four Month Incidence of Root Caries among a Diverse Group of Adults

Gilbert¹,

Duncan²,

Dolan³

et al. 2001

Caries Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: (1) Describe for a diverse sample the 24–month incidence of root caries, and (2) test its association with a broad range of clinical, behavioral, financial, and sociodemographic factors. Methods: The Florida Dental Care Study was a cohort study of randomly selected subjects who had at least 1 tooth and were 45 years or older at baseline. In–person interviews and clinical examinations were conducted at baseline and 24 months, with 6–monthly telephone interviews between those times; 723 subjects participated for both examinations. A multinomial logistic regression was done to predict whether the subject was in one of four mutually exclusive groups [new root decay only (NDO); new root filling(s) only (NFO); both new decay and new filling(s) (BOTH), or had neither (NONE)]. Results: Thirty–six percent of subjects had at least 1 new root decayed and/or filled surface (DFS); 17% were in the NDO group, 14% in the NFO group, and 5% in the BOTH group. When limited to participants who had a nonzero increment, the mean (SD) DFS was 2.7 (2.9). Baseline clinical condition (presence of root decay, root filling(s), coronal decay, noncarious root defects, number of teeth present, percent of teeth with at least 4 mm of attachment loss) was predictive of moving from the NONE group into the NDO, NFO, or BOTH groups. The addition of behavioral, financial, and sociodemographic factors improved model fit. For example, regular dental attenders were significantly more likely to move from the NONE group into the NFO group, but regular attendance was not associated with a lower probability of moving from the NONE group into the NDO or BOTH groups. Conclusions: Root caries is a substantive dental health problem in this diverse sample of adults. These analyses demonstrate the utility of disaggregating caries incidence into four mutually exclusive groups for predictive models.

show abstract

“…Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel In the context of the natural history of dental caries among humans, root surface caries is generally assumed to be a later-onset condition which largely afflicts older people [Griffin et al, 2004]. Root surface caries affects the root surfaces of teeth, and exposure of those root surfaces is understood to be a necessary (but not sufficient) precondition for its occurrence [Katz, 1996]. Reports from studies of younger adults are scarce, although prevalence estimates for root surface caries (defined as 1+ root DFS) among younger US adults indicate that it was present in approximately 1 in 7 18-to 24-year-olds, and 1 in 5 35-to 44-year-olds in the NHANES II study [Winn et al, 1996].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Antecedents and Associations of Root Surface Caries Experience among 38-Year-Olds

Thomson

Broadbent²,

Page³

et al. 2012

Caries Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine whether coronal caries experience through to the 30s predicts root surface caries experience by age 38. Method: Prospective study of a complete birth cohort (n = 1,037) born in 1972/73 in Dunedin, New Zealand. Dental examinations were conducted at ages 5, 9, 15, 18, 26, 32 and 38. Root surface caries data were first collected at age 38. Data from ages 5 through 32 were used previously to identify low, medium and high life course trajectories of caries experience and plaque accumulation. Results: Of the 916 dentate individuals examined at age 38, 23.0% had 1+ root DFS, 17.2% had 1+ root DS and 11.4% had 1+ root FS. The mean root DS, FS and DFS were 0.6 (SD 3.5), 0.3 (SD 1.1) and 0.9 (SD 3.8), respectively. The mean Root Caries Index (RCI) score was 7.2% (SD 18.0). Age 38 coronal DMFS and root surface caries DFS were only weakly correlated (r = 0.32), but root surface caries experience was strongly associated with coronal caries trajectory, with the mean RCI in the low, medium and high caries trajectory groups being 4.4, 8.0 and 13.5%, respectively (p < 0.0001); their prevalence of 1+ root DFS was 14.5, 25.9 and 42.2% (p < 0.0001). Those in the high coronal caries trajectory were more likely to have 1+ root surface DFS (odds ratio = 3.83; 95% CI = 2.33–6.30); for the medium trajectory, the odds ratio was 1.86 (95% CI = 1.25–2.75). Conclusion: Lifelong coronal caries experience (represented by discrete longitudinal trajectories of caries experience) is indeed a risk factor for root surface caries experience by age 38.

show abstract

The RCI Revisited after 15 Years: Used, Reinvented, Modified, Debated, and Natural Logged

Cited by 15 publications

References 26 publications

A Predictive Model for Root Caries Incidence

A Predictive Model for Root Caries Incidence

Twenty–Four Month Incidence of Root Caries among a Diverse Group of Adults

Antecedents and Associations of Root Surface Caries Experience among 38-Year-Olds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About