Back

Cross-Sectional Measures of Periodontal Severity: Distortion from Severity-Dependent Tooth Loss

McCormick, K. M.; Amarasena, N.; Guzzo, G.; Nath, S.; Jamieson, L.

2026-05-30 dentistry and oral medicine
10.64898/2026.05.27.26354277 medRxiv
Show abstract

Aim: Cross-sectional summaries of periodontitis based on clinical attachment loss (CAL) are, by definition, conditioned on surviving teeth. Because the most severely affected teeth are more likely to have been lost, these measures may underestimate cumulative disease burden and show an artificial flattening (attenuation) of severity with age. We hypothesised that measures more sensitive to severe attachment loss would show greater attenuation at older ages than measures defined across a broader range of sites. Materials and Methods: Using nationally representative data from adults aged 30+ years in NHANES 2009-2014, we examined age-specific trajectories across multiple continuous measures of periodontal severity and assessed whether divergence between measures followed the pattern predicted under severity-dependent tooth loss. Results: The proportion of observable sites declined from 93% at ages 30-34 to 68% at 80+ years, establishing the structural basis for the divergence observed across severity measures. All severity measures showed nonlinear attenuation with age, with distortion increasing with severity threshold. Higher-threshold measures exhibited the greatest attenuation, while lower-threshold measures showed more stable trajectories. Conclusions: Cross-sectional summaries of periodontitis reflect disease among surviving teeth rather than cumulative damage across teeth originally at risk. Attenuation at older ages is consistent with depletion of the most severely affected teeth rather than biological slowing. Distortion varies by measure, with higher-threshold and mean-based indices most affected, whereas the CAL 3+ mm threshold provides a more stable basis for age comparisons.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of Dental Research
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
29.6%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
10.8%
3
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 10%
7.7%
4
Royal Society Open Science
193 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
50% of probability mass above
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 26%
4.5%
6
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 16%
4.2%
7
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
8
Biomolecules
95 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
9
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
10
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
11
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.6%
12
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
13
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 55%
1.4%
14
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
15
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
16
Infection
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
17
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
18
Journal of Medical Microbiology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
19
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
20
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.8%
21
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
22
JBMR Plus
16 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.5%
23
Human Molecular Genetics
130 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.5%