JDR JDR Most Read Articles
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stewart, P. W.
Right arrow Articles by Stamm, J. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stewart, P. W.
Right arrow Articles by Stamm, J. W.

Journal of Dental Research, Vol 70, 1239-1251, Copyright © 1991 by International & American Associations for Dental Research Online Journals


ARTICLES

Classification tree prediction models for dental caries from clinical, microbiological, and interview data

P. W. Stewart and J. W. Stamm
Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 27599-7400.

Caries prediction by Classification And Regression Tree (CART) analysis is an appropriate and powerful alternative or complement to the commonly used classification methods of logistic regression and discriminant analysis, both parametric and nonparametric. The binary classification tree method discussed in this article is designed for complex data and does not require assumptions about the predictor variables or about the presence or absence of interactions among the predictor variables. Furthermore, the results give insight into the structures and interactions in the data and are easy to interpret and apply. In preliminary applications of the CART algorithms to data from The University of North Carolina Caries Risk Assessment Study, the method produced prediction rules having sensitivities and specificities that were similar to or slightly better than those associated with logistic and discriminant analyses. The classification trees constructed tended to involve far fewer predictor variables than required for adequate logistic and discriminant models. For example, for first-grade children in Aiken, South Carolina, nine variables were used to define a prediction rule having 64% sensitivity and 86% specificity. Ten-fold cross-validation estimates for future data were 58% and 79%, respectively. For first-grade children in Portland, Maine, two variables were used to define a prediction rule having 62% sensitivity and 77% specificity. The cross-validation estimates for future data were 58% and 78%, respectively. A brief, and previously unavailable, explanation of the CART method is given for the special case of a dichotomous outcome variable.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Adv. Dent. Res.Home page
S.A. Gansky
Dental Data Mining: Potential Pitfalls and Practical Issues
Adv. Dent. Res., December 1, 2003; 17(1): 109 - 114.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Asia Pac J Public HealthHome page
T. Saito, H. Miyazaki, A. Bahar, A. Rahardjo, H. Djoharnas, Y. Katoh, Y. Kusukawa, T. Takehara, and T. Koga
Oral Health Condition and Endemic Goitre, in an Iodine-deficient Area in Bali, Indonesia
Asia Pac J Public Health, January 1, 2001; 13(1): 45 - 48.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 1991 Institutional Access Guidelines