Xiangqun Ju, Ningsheng Zhao, Pedro Henrique Ribeiro Santiago, Gloria C Mejia, Lisa Jamieson, Hawazin Elani
Objective: Traumatic dental injury (TDI) is the world's fifth most common injury affecting children and adolescents. This study aimed to predict TDI based on ear problems and other factors among Australian children aged 4 years or over.
Methods: We used two longitudinal studies: the Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) and the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). The outcome was the prevalence of TDI in children aged 14 years. We assessed 50 features, including demographic characteristics, health conditions (such as ear diseases) and health-related behaviours of the children, their parents, and other family members in children aged 4-6 years. The performance of machine learning algorithms was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with its 95% confidence interval, along with sensitivity (recall), specificity, precision (positive predictive value), F1 score (the harmonic mean of sensitivity and precision) and accuracy (the proportion of correct predictions). These metrics were evaluated for the full sample and separately for Indigenous and non-Indigenous subgroups, using both the full sample and stratified models. A sensitivity analysis was performed to compare model performance across the groups.
Results: This study included 1746 Indigenous and 8357 non-Indigenous children and their parents and family members. The prevalence of TDI among Australian children at age 14 was approximately 13%. The full sample model applied to the full sample and the non-Indigenous subpopulation demonstrated high predictive performance, with AUCs of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89), respectively. In contrast, the model applied to the Indigenous subpopulation demonstrated lower performance, with AUC values ranging from 0.76 (95% CI: 0.68-0.83) in the full sample model to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83) in the stratified model.
Conclusions: Our findings indicated that early childhood ear problems were strong predictors of traumatic dental injuries in Australian children.
{"title":"Early Childhood Ear Diseases and Traumatic Dental Injuries: A Machine Learning Approach.","authors":"Xiangqun Ju, Ningsheng Zhao, Pedro Henrique Ribeiro Santiago, Gloria C Mejia, Lisa Jamieson, Hawazin Elani","doi":"10.1111/edt.70023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.70023","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Traumatic dental injury (TDI) is the world's fifth most common injury affecting children and adolescents. This study aimed to predict TDI based on ear problems and other factors among Australian children aged 4 years or over.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used two longitudinal studies: the Longitudinal Study of Indigenous Children (LSIC) and the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC). The outcome was the prevalence of TDI in children aged 14 years. We assessed 50 features, including demographic characteristics, health conditions (such as ear diseases) and health-related behaviours of the children, their parents, and other family members in children aged 4-6 years. The performance of machine learning algorithms was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with its 95% confidence interval, along with sensitivity (recall), specificity, precision (positive predictive value), F1 score (the harmonic mean of sensitivity and precision) and accuracy (the proportion of correct predictions). These metrics were evaluated for the full sample and separately for Indigenous and non-Indigenous subgroups, using both the full sample and stratified models. A sensitivity analysis was performed to compare model performance across the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 1746 Indigenous and 8357 non-Indigenous children and their parents and family members. The prevalence of TDI among Australian children at age 14 was approximately 13%. The full sample model applied to the full sample and the non-Indigenous subpopulation demonstrated high predictive performance, with AUCs of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.82-0.88) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.89), respectively. In contrast, the model applied to the Indigenous subpopulation demonstrated lower performance, with AUC values ranging from 0.76 (95% CI: 0.68-0.83) in the full sample model to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.70-0.83) in the stratified model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings indicated that early childhood ear problems were strong predictors of traumatic dental injuries in Australian children.</p>","PeriodicalId":55180,"journal":{"name":"Dental Traumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145337903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Aim: This study aims to assess the impact of visual case scenarios on parental awareness and urgency perception regarding enamel-dentin fractures in children.
Methods: This descriptive study included parents of children aged 4-14 who were receiving active dental care. Data were collected via a structured questionnaire, which consisted of two sections: demographic characteristics and general knowledge questions, and visual case-based scenarios to evaluate trauma perception. Statistical analysis was conducted using descriptive methods and chi-square testing. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.
Results: A total of 317 participants participated in the study; 65.9% of the participants were mothers and 56.8% had female children. A history of dental trauma was reported by 11.7% of parents. Regarding information sources, 50% relied on dentists or healthcare professionals, and 30.1% used the Internet. After a traumatic event, 42% preferred consulting a pediatric dentist, while 25.2% would visit a general dentist. 62.1% of participants could distinguish between primary and permanent teeth, but only 45.1% believed that the tooth type (primary or permanent) influenced treatment decisions. Regarding trauma concerns, 62.8% prioritized treatment for anterior teeth due to the risk of future complications. 96.8% acknowledged that the time elapsed since the trauma could affect treatment outcomes, and 72.2% considered fracture size important in treatment decisions. Furthermore, 87.1% did not view posterior tooth fractures as concerning as anterior ones.
Conclusion: This study highlights significant gaps in parental knowledge about pediatric dental trauma, stressing the need for improved education on trauma severity, timely intervention, and the impact of fracture size and tooth type on treatment.
{"title":"Parental Awareness and Decision-Making in Enamel-Dentin Fractures in Permanent Teeth: The Role of Visual Case Scenarios.","authors":"Gizem Tıraşçı, Tuba Aydan, Sacide Duman","doi":"10.1111/edt.70024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/edt.70024","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to assess the impact of visual case scenarios on parental awareness and urgency perception regarding enamel-dentin fractures in children.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive study included parents of children aged 4-14 who were receiving active dental care. Data were collected via a structured questionnaire, which consisted of two sections: demographic characteristics and general knowledge questions, and visual case-based scenarios to evaluate trauma perception. Statistical analysis was conducted using descriptive methods and chi-square testing. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 317 participants participated in the study; 65.9% of the participants were mothers and 56.8% had female children. A history of dental trauma was reported by 11.7% of parents. Regarding information sources, 50% relied on dentists or healthcare professionals, and 30.1% used the Internet. After a traumatic event, 42% preferred consulting a pediatric dentist, while 25.2% would visit a general dentist. 62.1% of participants could distinguish between primary and permanent teeth, but only 45.1% believed that the tooth type (primary or permanent) influenced treatment decisions. Regarding trauma concerns, 62.8% prioritized treatment for anterior teeth due to the risk of future complications. 96.8% acknowledged that the time elapsed since the trauma could affect treatment outcomes, and 72.2% considered fracture size important in treatment decisions. Furthermore, 87.1% did not view posterior tooth fractures as concerning as anterior ones.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study highlights significant gaps in parental knowledge about pediatric dental trauma, stressing the need for improved education on trauma severity, timely intervention, and the impact of fracture size and tooth type on treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":55180,"journal":{"name":"Dental Traumatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145338246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}