Methodological Approaches to Comparative Trend Analyses: The Case of Adolescent Toothbrushing.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal of Public Health Pub Date : 2025-01-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/ijph.2024.1607669
Torbjørn Torsheim, Frank J Elgar, Alina Cosma, Caroline Residori, Oddrun Samdal, Christina Schnohr
{"title":"Methodological Approaches to Comparative Trend Analyses: The Case of Adolescent Toothbrushing.","authors":"Torbjørn Torsheim, Frank J Elgar, Alina Cosma, Caroline Residori, Oddrun Samdal, Christina Schnohr","doi":"10.3389/ijph.2024.1607669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Research questions about how and why health trends differ between populations require decisions about data analytic procedure. The objective was to document and compare the information returned from stratified, fixed effect and random effect approaches to data modelling for two prototypical descriptive research questions about comparative trends in toothbrushing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data included five cycles of the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children 2006 to 2022, which provided a sample of 980192 11- to 15- year olds from 35 countries. Using logistic regression models and generalized linear mixed models, toothbrushing daily was regressed on time, following the three approaches to analysis of trends.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The stratified approach suggested a positive but non-linear trend in toothbrushing from 2006 to 2022 in most countries but provided no statistical inference on the variation. The fixed effect and the random effect approach converged on a positive but flattening overall trend, with a statistically significant country variation in trends.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Only the fixed effect approach and the random effects approach provided clear answers to the research question. Additional methodological considerations for making an informed choice of analytical approach are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":14322,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Public Health","volume":"69 ","pages":"1607669"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11757018/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2024.1607669","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Research questions about how and why health trends differ between populations require decisions about data analytic procedure. The objective was to document and compare the information returned from stratified, fixed effect and random effect approaches to data modelling for two prototypical descriptive research questions about comparative trends in toothbrushing.

Methods: Data included five cycles of the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children 2006 to 2022, which provided a sample of 980192 11- to 15- year olds from 35 countries. Using logistic regression models and generalized linear mixed models, toothbrushing daily was regressed on time, following the three approaches to analysis of trends.

Results: The stratified approach suggested a positive but non-linear trend in toothbrushing from 2006 to 2022 in most countries but provided no statistical inference on the variation. The fixed effect and the random effect approach converged on a positive but flattening overall trend, with a statistically significant country variation in trends.

Conclusion: Only the fixed effect approach and the random effects approach provided clear answers to the research question. Additional methodological considerations for making an informed choice of analytical approach are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较趋势分析的方法学方法:青少年刷牙的案例。
目的:研究不同人群之间的健康趋势如何以及为什么不同的问题,需要对数据分析程序作出决定。目的是记录和比较从分层、固定效应和随机效应的数据建模方法返回的信息,以比较刷牙趋势的两个原型描述性研究问题。方法:数据包括2006年至2022年学龄儿童健康行为的五个周期,提供了来自35个国家的980192名11至15岁的样本。采用logistic回归模型和广义线性混合模型对每日刷牙时间进行回归,采用三种方法进行趋势分析。结果:分层方法表明,从2006年到2022年,大多数国家的刷牙趋势呈积极但非线性的趋势,但没有对变化提供统计推断。固定效应和随机效应方法趋同于一个积极但趋于平缓的总体趋势,趋势在统计上存在显著的国家差异。结论:只有固定效应法和随机效应法对研究问题提供了明确的答案。讨论了对分析方法作出明智选择的其他方法学考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Public Health
International Journal of Public Health 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
269
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Public Health publishes scientific articles relevant to global public health, from different countries and cultures, and assembles them into issues that raise awareness and understanding of public health problems and solutions. The Journal welcomes submissions of original research, critical and relevant reviews, methodological papers and manuscripts that emphasize theoretical content. IJPH sometimes publishes commentaries and opinions. Special issues highlight key areas of current research. The Editorial Board''s mission is to provide a thoughtful forum for contemporary issues and challenges in global public health research and practice.
期刊最新文献
Core Measure Set for Patient Safety in Perioperative Care: A Clinical Practice-Oriented Consensus Study. Predictors of Loneliness, Mental Wellbeing, and Stress During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Switzerland. The Meaning of Leadership in Medical Education in the Pan American Health Organization Member States: A Stakeholder Analysis and Interviews. Desk Rejection Decisions - Do Co-Editors-In-Chief of This Journal Agree? Development and Examination of the Psychometric Properties of the Social Perception of Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Scale in the Turkish Context: Evidence From Hatay Province.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1