This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Berkey, C.S. Articles by Pihlstrom, B.L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Berkey, C.S. Articles by Pihlstrom, B.L. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Multiple-outcomes Meta-analysis of Treatments for Periodontal Disease

Technology Assessment Group, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115

A. Antczak-Bouckoms

Technology Assessment Group, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115

D.C. Hoaglin

Technology Assessment Group, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, Department of Statistics, Harvard University, Abt Associates Inc.

E. Mosteller

Technology Assessment Group, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, Department of Statistics, Harvard University

B.L. Pihlstrom

Minnesota Clinical Dental Research Center, University of Minnesota

The results of periodontal therapy vary by disease severity, outcome measure, and method of data analysis. Several clinical trials and a subsequent meta-analysis have demonstrated that, for teeth with severe disease, surgery decreases probing depth (PD) and increases attachment level (AL) more than non-surgical treatment. For other disease levels, the choice of therapy depends on the outcome measure. When clinical trials use two or more outcome measures (such as PD and AL), investigators ordinarily analyze each outcome separately. When the correlations are incorporated among the outcomes, a meta-analysis can use generalized-least-squares (GLS) regression to analyze multiple outcomes jointly. We applied the GLS multiple-outcomes model in a meta-analysis of 5 trials comparing surgical and non-surgical periodontal treatments, each assessing the outcomes PD and AL one year after treatment. The clinical conclusions are similar to those reported earlier, but our estimates of the relative benefits of surgical and non-surgical treatment should be more accurate, because the GLS method takes into account correlation between AL and PD. When correlations between the two outcomes rise, as they do with increasing severity of disease, the GLS estimates depart from those derived from separate analyses of PD and AL.

Key Words: attachment loss • probing depth • statistical models • correlations • research synthesis

Journal of Dental Research, Vol. 74, No. 4, 1030-1039 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/00220345950740040201


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. D. Riley, J. R. Thompson, and K. R. Abrams An alternative model for bivariate random-effects meta-analysis when the within-study correlations are unknown Biostat., January 1, 2008; 9(1): 172 - 186. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.D. Rudney Does Variability in Salivary Protein Concentrations Influence Oral Microbial Ecology and Oral Health? Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine, January 1, 1995; 6(4): 343 - 367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]