Accuracy of medical subject heading indexing of dental survival analyses

PURPOSE: To assess the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) indexing of articles that employed time-to-event analyses to report outcomes of dental treatment in patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Articles published in 2008 in 50 dental journals with the highest impact factors were hand searched to identify articles reporting dental treatment outcomes over time in human subjects with time-to-event statistics (included, n = 95), without time-to-event statistics (active controls, n = 91), and all other articles (passive controls, n = 6,769). The search was systematic (kappa 0.92 for screening, 0.86 for eligibility). Outcome-, statistic- and time-related MeSH were identified, and differences in allocation between groups were analyzed with chi-square and Fischer exact statistics.

RESULTS: The most frequently allocated MeSH for included and active control articles were "dental restoration failure" (77% and 52%, respectively) and "treatment outcome" (54% and 48%, respectively). Outcome MeSH was similar between these groups (86% and 77%, respectively) and significantly greater than passive controls (10%, P < .001). Significantly more statistical MeSH were allocated to the included articles than to the active or passive controls (67%, 15%, and 1%, respectively, P < .001). Sixty-nine included articles specifically used Kaplan-Meier or life table analyses, but only 42% (n = 29) were indexed as such. Significantly more time-related MeSH were allocated to the included than the active controls (92% and 79%, respectively, P = .02), or to the passive controls (22%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS: MeSH allocation within MEDLINE to time-to-event dental articles was inaccurate and inconsistent. Statistical MeSH were omitted from 30% of the included articles and incorrectly allocated to 15% of active controls. Such errors adversely impact search accuracy.

Epidemiology of Dysglycemia in Pregnant Oklahoma American Indian Women

CONTEXT: Minority communities are disproportionately affected by diabetes, and minority women are at an increased risk for glucose intolerance (dysglycemia) during pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: In pregnant American Indian women, the objectives of the study were to use current criteria to estimate the prevalence of first-trimester (Tr1) dysglycemia and second-trimester (Tr2) incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to explore new candidate measures and identify associated clinical factors.

DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. In Tr1 we performed a 75-g, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) to determine the following: fasting insulin; homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; serum 1,5-anhydroglucitol; noninvasive skin autofluorescence (SCOUT). We defined dysglycemia by American Diabetes Association and Endocrine Society criteria and as HbA1c of 5.7% or greater. In Tr2 in an available subset, we performed a repeat OGTT and SCOUT.

PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant American Indian women (n = 244 at Tr1; n = 114 at Tr2) participated in the study.

OUTCOMES: The prevalence of dysglycemia at Tr1 and incidence of GDM at Tr2 were measured.

RESULTS: At Tr1, one woman had overt diabetes; 36 (15%) had impaired glucose tolerance (American Diabetes Association criteria and/or abnormal HbA1c) and 59 (24%) had GDM-Tr1 (Endocrine Society criteria). Overall, 74 (30%) had some form of dysglycemia. Associated factors were body mass index, hypertension, waist/hip circumferences, SCOUT score, fasting insulin, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance. At Tr2, 114 of the Tr1 cohort underwent a repeat OGTT and SCOUT, and 26 (23%) had GDM. GDM-Tr2 was associated with increased SCOUT scores (P = .029) and Tr1 body mass index, waist/hip circumferences, diastolic blood pressure, fasting insulin, and triglyceride levels. Overall, dysglycemia at Tr1 and/or Tr2 affected 38% of the women.

CONCLUSIONS: Dysglycemia at some point during pregnancy was common among American Indian women. It was associated with features of insulin resistance and may confer long-term health risks for mother and child.

Validity of a personal and family history of cataract and cataract surgery in genetic studies.

PURPOSE:

To determine the accuracy of a history of cataract and cataract surgery (self-report and for a sibling), and to determine which demographic, cognitive, and medical factors are predictive of an accurate history.

METHODS:

All participants in the Salisbury Eye Evaluation (SEE) project and their locally resident siblings were questioned about a personal and family history of cataract or cataract surgery. Lens grading at the slit lamp, using standardized photographs and a grading system, was performed for both SEE participants (probands) and their siblings. Cognitive testing and a history of systemic comorbidities were also obtained for all probands.

RESULTS:

Sensitivity of a history of cataract provided on behalf of a sibling was 32%, specificity 98%. The performance was better for a history of cataract surgery: sensitivity 90%, specificity 89%. For self-report of cataract, sensitivity was also low at 55%, with specificity at 77%. Self-report of cataract surgery gave a much better performance: sensitivity 94%, specificity 100%. Different cutoffs in the definition of cataract had little impact. Factors predicting a correct history of cataract included high school or greater education in the proband (odds ratio [OR] = 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]1.02-1.25) and younger sibling (but not proband) age (OR = 0.94 for each year of age, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Gender, race and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) result were not predictive.

CONCLUSIONS:

Whereas accurate self and family histories for cataract surgery may be obtainable, it is difficult to ascertain cataract status accurately from history alone.