Journal of Dental Research, Vol 79, 1778-1781, Copyright © 2000 by International & American Associations for Dental Research Online Journals

ARTICLES

Between-subject and within-subject statistical information in dental research

L. A. Mancl, B. G. Leroux and T. A. DeRouen
Department of Dental Public Health Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle 98195-7475, USA. lman@biostat.washington.edu

The evaluation of risk factors in dental research frequently uses observations at multiple sites in the same patient. For this reason, statistical methods that accommodate correlated data are generally used to assess the significance of the risk factors (e.g., generalized estimating equations, generalized linear mixed models). In applications of these methods, it is typically assumed (implicitly, if not explicitly) that between-subject and within-subject comparisons will produce the same estimated effect of the risk factor. When between- and within-subject comparisons conflict, the statistical methods can give biased estimates or results that are difficult to interpret. For illustration, we present two examples from periodontal disease studies in which different statistical methods give different estimates and significance levels for a risk factor. Statistical analyses in dental research should assess whether different sources of information give similar conclusions about risk factors or treatments.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C.V. Ananth and M.L. Kantor Modeling Multivariate Binary Responses with Multiple Levels of Nesting Based on Alternating Logistic Regressions: an Application to Caries Aggregation J. Dent. Res., October 1, 2004; 83(10): 776 - 781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]