Table 1 Main characteristics of included studies of multivariable prediction models of caries increment. A detailed description of included studies is presented in Additional file 4
From: Multivariable prediction models of caries increment: a systematic review and critical appraisal
First author and year [ref] | Country Year | Age (years) at baseline | Outcome (caries increment) Method for measurement | Sample size | Number of events (E) | Events per variable (EPV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Studies of model development | ||||||
Coronal caries | ||||||
Angulo 1995 [13] | Uruguay 1988–1990 | 12–13 | DS ˃ 1 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 69 | 19 | 6.33 |
Demers 1992 [14] | Canada 1988 | Mean 5 | dmfs ˃ 0 dentine Visual-tactile examination | 302 | 143 | 15.9 |
Disney 1992 [15] | USA 1986–1989 | 6 and 10 | - DMFS ≥ 2 dentine - DMFS ≥ 4 dentine Visual-tactile examination | 965–1099 | 204–234 | 5.2–5.6 |
Fontana 2011 [16] | Puerto Rico 2007 | 5–13 | - ICDAS ≥ 1enamel - ICDAS ≥ 3 cavity Visual-tactile examination and bitewing radiography | 395 | 239–35 | 5.8–8.7 |
Gao 2010 [17] | Singapore 2009–2010 | 3–6 | dmft ˃ 0 dentine Visual-tactile examination | 1576 | 689 | 57–114.8 |
Hänsel Petersson 2002 [18] | Sweden 1998 | 10–11 | DMFS/DMFT > 0 dentine Dental records with bitewing radiography | 392 | 121 | 10 |
Pang 2021 [19] | China 2018–2020 | 13–14 | ICDAS ≥ 3 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 633 | 365 | 7.7 |
Sánchez-Pérez 2009 [20] | Mexico 2001–2007 | 6 | dmfs/DMFS ≥ 1 dentine Visual-tactile examination | 95 | 56 | 5.1 |
Coronal and root caries | ||||||
Powell 1991 [21] | USA NR | 66–95 | ≥ 1 coronal and/or root lesion Visual-tactile examination | 21 | 16 | 0.7 |
Root caries | ||||||
Ritter 2016 [22] | USA 2007–2008 | Mean 52 | Any incident root caries Visual-tactile examination | 155 | 76 | 5.8–9.5 |
Sánchez-García 2011 [23] | Mexico 2004–2005 | Mean 73 | ≥ 1 root surfaces Visual-tactile examination | 531 | 115 | 3.7 |
Studies of model validation | ||||||
Coronal caries | ||||||
Beck 1992 [24] | USA 1986–1989 | 6, 10 | - DMFS ≥ 2 dentine - DMFS ≥ 4 dentine Visual-tactile examination | 965–1099 | 338–642 | 8.7–14.6 |
Birpou 2019 [25] | Greece NR | 2–5 | “Sound to non-cavitated” + “non-cavitated to cavitated” Visual-tactile examination | 140–147 | 74–77 | 8.2–10.1 |
Campus 2012 [26] | Italy 2007–2009 | 7–9 | DFS ˃ 0 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 861 | 469 | 67 |
Christian 2020 [27] | Australia NR | 1.5 | ICDAS-II ˃ 0 cavity Visual examination | 214 | 39–75 | 3.0–5.8 |
Dolic 2020 [28] | Bosnia and Herzegovina 2007–2011 | Mean 27 | DMFT ˃ 1 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 80 | 5 | 6 |
Gao 2013 [29] | Hong Kong NR | 3 | dmft ˃ 0 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 485 | 178 | 16.2–35.6 |
Hänsel Petersson 2015 [30] | Sweden 2006–2007 | 19 | DFS ≥ 1 dentine Visual-tactile examination, bitewing radiography | 982 | 344 | 4.1–13.66 |
Hänsel Petersson 2010 [31] | Sweden 1998–2000 | 10–11 | DMFS ˃ 0 dentine Dental records and bitewing radiography | 392 | 122 | 13.5–20.3 |
Lif Holgerson 2009 [32] | Sweden 2002–2007 | 2 | dmfs/DMFS > 0 enamel and dentine Visual-tactile examination and bitewing radiography | 55 | 20 | 2.9 |
Pang 2020 [19] | China 2018–2020 | 13–14 | ICDAS ≥ 3 cavity Visual-tactile examination | 320 | 202 | 4.4 |
Root caries | ||||||
Hayes 2018 [33] | Ireland 2012–2015 | ≥ 65 | ≥ 1 root surface with cavity Visual-tactile examination | 280 | 70 | 7.8–11.7 |