Skip to main content
Wellcome Open Research logoLink to Wellcome Open Research
. 2018 Apr 30;3:34. Originally published 2018 Mar 26. [Version 2] doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.14159.2

Age 23 years + oral health questionnaire in Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children.

Tom Dudding 1,2, Simon Haworth 1,2, Jonathan Sandy 3, Nicholas J Timpson 1,a
PMCID: PMC5941244  PMID: 29806037

Version Changes

Revised. Amendments from Version 1

This revision of the article makes changes in response to referees 1 and 2. The most noteworthy changes are the inclusion of Figure 1, a flow diagram to clearly show the recruitment of participants to the study, and an additional Table 15 in the data validity section showing numbers and percentages of valid responses to each question. Tables 4 and 5 have also been updated to include the Federation Dentaire Internationale (FDI) numbering system alongside the letters and numbers system.

Abstract

Oral health data in large longitudinal cohort studies is rarely collected at multiple time-points. This type of data is important for assessing oral health trajectories and their determinants. This data resource includes self-report questionnaire data on up to 4,222 young adults at approximately 23 years of age from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC). The resource includes questions on dental attendance, tooth restorations and extractions, third molars (wisdom teeth) and mouth ulcers. This round of data collection follows on from similar questionnaires at ages 7, 10 and 17 years. The ALSPAC study provides an opportunity to combine this oral health data with extensive phenotype, genetic, epigenetic and metabolomic data from the participants, their mothers and fathers.

Keywords: ALSPAC, Oral Health, Dental, Dental Caries, Pericoronitis, Oral Ulcers, Wisdom Teeth

Introduction

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) is a longitudinal birth cohort that recruited pregnant women living near Bristol, UK with an estimated delivery date between 1991 and 1992 1. The study includes extensive phenotypic, genetic, epigenetic and metabolomic data on the mothers, fathers and children and follow up is ongoing. Information on the oral health of the children (now young adults) has been collected throughout the study by means of focussed questionnaires at age 7, 10 and 17 years. A smaller subset of participants also received clinical examinations at three time points before the age of 7 years. This dataset relates to the “Teeth” section of the “Me @ 23+” questionnaire that gathered information pertaining to the oral health of participants with the aim of allowing continued longitudinal assessment of their oral health. The questionnaire was designed to address or contribute to 4 research questions:

1) Can oral health in adolescence predict poor health outcomes in later life and if so at what stage is this detectable?

2) What are the major genetic and environmental risk factors for pericoronitis (infection of the gum area around wisdom teeth)?

3) At what stage do oral hygiene behaviours and beliefs predict periodontal outcomes? Are patterns of behaviour in childhood or early adult life more important?

4) What are the major genetic and environmental risk factors for mouth ulcers?

Methods

ALSPAC recruited 14,541 pregnant women resident in Avon, UK (former county covering Bristol and the surrounding areas in the South West UK) with expected dates of delivery 1st April 1991 to 31st December 1992. 14,541 is the initial number of pregnancies for which the mother enrolled in the ALSPAC study and had either returned at least one questionnaire or attended a “Children in Focus” clinic by 19/07/99. Of these initial pregnancies, there were a total of 14,676 foetuses, resulting in 14,062 live births and 13,988 children who were alive at 1 year of age. When the oldest children were approximately 7 years of age, an attempt was made to bolster the initial sample with eligible cases who had failed to join the study originally. As a result, when considering variables collected from the age of seven onwards (and potentially abstracted from obstetric notes) there are data available for more than the 14,541 pregnancies mentioned above.

The number of new pregnancies not in the initial sample (known as Phase I enrolment) that are currently represented on the built files and reflecting enrolment status at the age of 18 is 706 (452 and 254 recruited during Phases II and III respectively), resulting in an additional 713 children being enrolled. The phases of enrolment are described in more detail in the cohort profile paper 1, 2.

The total sample size for analyses using any data collected after the age of seven is therefore 15,247 pregnancies, resulting in 15,458 foetuses. Of this total sample of 15,458 foetuses, 14,775 were live births and 14,701 were alive at 1 year of age.

The data included in this resource were generated from a questionnaire that the ALSPAC children (now young adults) completed at approximately 23 years of age (“Me @ 23+”). The questionnaire included 13 sections (A to M). Oral health questions were in section J (“Teeth”).

Where oral health topics had been asked before in previous ALSPAC questionnaires the same questions were used for consistency. Questions about third molars (wisdom teeth) attempted to identify whether participants had their wisdom teeth present and whether they had caused problems and were adapted from the UK National Third Molar Audit 3.

The questionnaire was available to complete in online or paper format between November 2015 and September 2016. Completed paper questionnaires were read using Cardiff TeleForm version 10.1 (Autonomy Corporation plc, Cambridge, England), data collection for the online questionnaires was collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools 4 hosted at the University of Bristol.

Please note that the study website contains details of all the data that is available through a fully searchable data dictionary.

A version of the relevant section of the questionnaire is provided in Supplementary File 1.

There are a total of 15,573 records on this built file with 4,222 having returned a completed questionnaire. This number is made up of the 14,676 foetuses in the core ALSPAC sample plus 897 eligible children not in the core sample (regardless of whether or not the Me @ 23+ questionnaire was sent out to them or whether they were returned). This questionnaire was completed by 309 of these 897 children not in the core sample. Of the 14,676 foetuses in the core ALSPAC sample, 14,062 were live born. The Me @ 23+ questionnaire was sent out to 9,394 live born children within the ALSPAC cohort (60.3% of total sample). As of 30th of September 2016, 4,222 completed questionnaires had been returned (45% of those sent) ( Figure 1).

Figure 1. Recruitment of participants to the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC).

Figure 1.

Note that 3 of the 4,222 completed questionnaires belong to children from triplet or quadruplet pregnancies, all of whom are in the core sample. For reasons of confidentiality the data from these questionnaires are not available. All variables have been set to missing for these triplets and quadruplets.

The questionnaire has been split into four datasets. Each dataset is described below, the questions are stated and the data summarised in tables alongside the matching ALSPAC variable code (e.g. YPC1950).

Dataset 1. Visiting your dentist and tooth decay

This section asked participants about visiting the dentist, orthodontics and previous fillings and extractions. Where participants were asked to assess the current state of their own teeth they were encouraged to use a mirror, a diagrammatic representation of the mouth was included in the questionnaire to assist with accurate identification of teeth ( Supplementary File 1).

YPC1950. Length of time since respondent last went to the dentist ( Table 1).

Table 1. YPC1950.

Length of time since respondent last went to the dentist.

Variable name: YPC1950 Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 Never been 5 0.1 0.1
1 In the past year 2571 62.8 62.9
2 Between 1 and 2 years
ago
759 18.5 81.5
3 More than 2 years ago 713 17.4 98.9
9 Don't know 46 1.1 100.0
Total 4094 100.0

YPC1960. Reason respondent usually goes to the dentist ( Table 2).

Table 2. YPC1960.

Reason respondent usually goes to the dentist.

Variable name: YPC1960 Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 Never goes to the
dentist
112 2.7 2.7
1 Regular routine check-
ups (up to every 2 years)
2670 65.2 68.0
2 Occasional check-up
(less than every 2 years)
686 16.8 84.8
3 Only when has trouble
with teeth
554 13.5 98.3
4 Another reason 36 0.9 99.2
9 Don't know 34 0.8 100.0
Total 4092 100.0

YPC1970. Any of respondent’s teeth taken out for braces/traintracks/orthodontics ( Table 3).

Table 3. YPC1970.

Any of respondent's teeth taken out for braces/traintracks/orthodontics.

Variable
name:
YPC1970
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 No 2891 71.5 71.5
1 Yes 1152 28.5 100.0
Total 4043 100.0

YPC1980-YPC2007. Respondent's teeth that have fillings (28 variables).

Each of the 28 variables are associated with a single tooth. Each variable is coded 1 if the participant reported having a filling or other restoration in that tooth. Table 4 summarises the numbers and percentage with fillings/restorations for each tooth. These tables present right and left alongside each other for ease of comparison.

Table 4. YPC1980-YPC2031.

Reported frequency (%) of fillings and dental extractions for each tooth.

RIGHT LEFT
TOOTH
(FDI)
FILLING EXTRACTION TOOTH FILLING EXTRACTION
N % N % N % N %
UR1 (11) 159 3.9 21 0.5 UL1 (21) 174 4.2 18 0.4
UR2 (12) 83 2.0 62 1.5 UL2 (22) 92 2.2 66 1.6
UR3 (13) 70 1.7 66 1.6 UL3 (23) 62 1.5 71 1.7
UR4 (14) 110 2.7 153 3.7 UL4 (24) 99 2.4 169 4.1
UR5 (15) 251 6.1 139 3.4 UL5 (25) 237 5.8 145 3.5
UR6 (16) 614 15.0 102 2.5 UL6 (26) 637 15.5 101 2.5
UR7 (17) 413 10.1 126 3.1 UL7 (27) 471 11.5 127 3.1
LR1 (41) 42 1.0 9 0.2 LL1 (31) 61 1.5 22 0.5
LR2 (42) 52 1.3 21 0.5 LL2 (32) 63 1.5 16 0.4
LR3 (43) 52 1.3 42 1.0 LL3 (33) 62 1.5 43 1.1
LR4 (44) 72 1.8 92 2.2 LL4 (34) 84 2.1 90 2.2
LR5 (45) 175 4.3 131 3.2 LL5 (35) 203 5.0 140 3.4
LR6 (46) 706 17.2 92 2.2 LL6 (36) 724 17.7 102 2.5
LR7 (47) 576 14.0 134 3.3 LL7 (37) 562 13.7 134 3.3

U*# = Upper, L*# = Lower, *R# = Right, *L# = Left, number(#) indicates the tooth number from the midline, e.g. UR3 = Upper Right 3 – third tooth from midline on the upper right. FDI = Federation Dentaire Internationale numbering system.

YPC2010-YPC2031. Respondent's teeth that have been taken out (28 variables).

Each of the 28 variables are associated with a single tooth. Each variable is coded 1 if the participant reported having had their tooth taken out (extracted). Is should be noted that participants may have marked unerupted or congenitally absent teeth as ‘taken out’. Table 4 summarises the numbers and percentage with a tooth extracted for each tooth. These tables present right and left alongside each other for ease of comparison.

Dataset 2: Third molars (wisdom teeth)

This section asked participants about their third molars (wisdom teeth). Participants were asked to indicate if each of their wisdom teeth has come through (erupted) and if it had, whether or not it had caused problems. Further questions asked more details about the nature and frequency of wisdom tooth problems and about treatments for wisdom tooth problems.

YPC2040-YPC2043: Respondent’s wisdom teeth that haven’t come through (4 variables).

Participants were asked to indicate if each of their 4 wisdom teeth (third molars) had or had not come through (erupted). Each variable is coded 1 if the wisdom had not come through. Table 5 summarises the responses for each wisdom tooth. NB: Percentages are based on total number of participants who answered the questionnaire, not all participants answered this question for each tooth and this is indicated by the missing column.

Table 5. YPC2040-YPC2063.

Frequency (%) of respondent’s wisdom teeth that were unerupted, erupted with problems or erupted without problems.

TOOTH
(FDI)
UNERUPTED ERUPTED,
PROBLEMS
ERUPTED, NO
PROBLEMS
MISSING DATA
N % N % N % N %
UR8 (18) 1333 32.5 1351 32.9 476 11.6 1062 25.2
UL8 (28) 1355 33.0 1327 32.3 494 12.0 1046 24.8
LL8 (38) 1326 32.3 1175 28.6 640 15.6 1081 25.6
LR8 (48) 1350 32.9 1162 28.3 669 16.3 1041 24.7

U*=Upper, L*=Lower, *R=Right, *L=Left, e.g. UR = Upper Right. FDI = Federation Dentaire Internationale numbering system.

YPC2050-YPC2053: Respondent's wisdom teeth that have come through and not caused problems (4 variables).

Participants were asked to indicate if each of their 4 wisdom teeth (third molars) had come through and had not caused problems. Each variable is coded 1 if the wisdom had not come through. Table 5 summarises the responses for each wisdom tooth. NB: Percentages are based on total number of participants who answered the questionnaire, not all participants answered this question for each tooth and this is indicated by the missing column.

YPC2060-YPC2063: Respondent's wisdom teeth that have come through and caused problems or pain, even if these teeth have now been removed (4 variables).

Participants were asked to indicate if each of their 4 wisdom teeth (third molars) had come through and had caused problems or pain, even if these teeth had now been removed. Each variable is coded 1 if the wisdom had not come through. Table 5 summarises the responses for each wisdom tooth. NB: Percentages are based on total number of participants who answered the questionnaire, not all participants answered this question for each tooth and this is indicated by the missing column.

YPC2070: Number of times respondent has had pain from their wisdom teeth ( Table 6).

Table 6. YPC2070.

Number of times respondent has had pain from their wisdom teeth.

Variable name:
YPC2070
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 Never 1522 41.4 41.4
1 1 345 9.4 50.8
2 2-3 674 18.3 69.1
3 3-4 352 9.6 78.7
4 5 or more times 612 16.6 95.3
9 Don't know 173 4.7 100.0
Total 3678 100.0

YPC2071: Number of times respondent has had a course of antibiotics for problems with their wisdom teeth ( Table 7).

Table 7. YPC2071.

Number of times respondent has had a course of antibiotics for problems with their wisdom teeth.

Variable name:
YPC2071
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 Never 3133 85.6 85.6
1 1 286 7.8 93.4
2 2-3 115 3.1 96.6
3 3-4 35 1.0 97.5
4 5 or more
times
40 1.1 98.6
9 Don't know 50 1.4 100.0
Total 3659 100.0

YPC2072: Number of times respondent has had facial swelling from their wisdom teeth ( Table 8).

Table 8. YPC2072.

Number of times respondent has had facial swelling from their wisdom teeth.

Variable name:
YPC2072
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 Never 3013 82.4 82.4
1 1 333 9.1 91.5
2 2-3 154 4.2 95.8
3 3-4 49 1.3 97.1
4 5 or more
times
50 1.4 98.5
9 Don't know 56 1.5 100.0
Total 3655 100.0

YPC2080: Respondent has ever had to stay in a hospital bed, either during the day or overnight, because of problems from their wisdom teeth ( Table 9).

Table 9. YPC2080.

Respondent has ever had to stay in a hospital bed, either during the day or overnight, because of problems from their wisdom teeth.

Variable name:
YPC2080
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 No 3562 95.9 95.9
1 Yes 126 3.4 99.3
9 Don't know 26 0.7 100.0
Total 3714 100.0

YPC2090: Respondent has had any wisdom teeth removed ( Table 10).

Table 10. YPC2090.

Respondent has had any wisdom teeth removed.

Variable name:
YPC2090
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 No 3288 88.5 88.5
1 Yes 368 9.9 98.4
9 Don't know 58 1.6 100.0
Total 3714 100.0

YPC2100: Respondent has had any other treatment to their wisdom teeth when they were causing pain, like cleaning around the gum or removing part of the gum ( Table 11).

Table 11. YPC2100.

Respondent has had any other treatment to their wisdom teeth when they were causing pain, like cleaning around the gum or removing part of the gum.

Variable name:
YPC2100
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 No 3376 91.6 91.6
1 Yes 253 6.9 98.5
9 Don't know 56 1.5 100.0
Total 3685 100.0

Dataset 3: Mouth ulcers

This section asked participants about whether they had ever had mouth ulcers, the age at onset and the frequency of their occurrence.

YPC2110: Respondent ever had mouth ulcers ( Table 12).

Table 12. YPC2110.

Respondent ever had mouth ulcers.

Variable name: YPC2110 Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
0 No 1079 26.6 26.6
1 Yes, but only once or twice 1119 27.6 54.2
2 Yes, on several occasions 1751 43.2 97.4
9 Don't know 104 2.6 100.0
Total 4053 100.0

YPC2111: Age when respondent first noticed that they had mouth ulcers ( Table 13).

Table 13. YPC2111.

Age when respondent first noticed that they had mouth ulcers.

Variable name: YPC2111 Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
1 Before was a teenager
(or under 12 years)
922 31.4 31.4
2 While a teenager (13-19) 1251 42.7 74.1
3 In 20s 250 8.5 82.6
9 Don't remember 509 17.4 100.0
Total 2932 100.0

YPC2112: Frequency respondent gets mouth ulcers ( Table 14).

Table 14. YPC2112.

Frequency respondent gets mouth ulcers.

Variable name:
YPC2112
Frequency Percent Cumulative
Percent
1 Every month 222 7.5 7.5
2 Every 2-3 months 496 16.9 24.4
3 At least once every
6 months
612 20.8 45.2
4 At least once a year 496 16.9 62.1
5 Less than yearly 879 29.9 92.0
9 Don't remember 236 8.0 100.0
Total 2941 100.0

Table 15. Valid and missing responses.

Variable
name:
Variable topic Valid (%) Missing (%)
YPC1950 Length of time since respondent last went to the dentist 4094 (97.0) 128 (3.0)
YPC1960 Reason respondent usually goes to the dentist 4092 (96.9) 130 (3.1)
YPC1970 Any of respondent’s teeth taken out for braces/traintracks/orthodontics 4043 (95.8) 179 (4.2)
YPC2070 Number of times respondent has had pain from their wisdom teeth 3678 (87.1) 544 (12.9)
YPC2071 Number of times respondent has had a course of antibiotics for problems with their
wisdom teeth
3659 (86.7) 563 (13.3)
YPC2072 Number of times respondent has had facial swelling from their wisdom teeth 3655 (86.6) 567 (13.4)
YPC2080 Respondent has ever had to stay in a hospital bed, either during the day or overnight,
because of problems from their wisdom teeth
3714 (88.0) 508 (12.0)
YPC2090 Respondent has had any wisdom teeth removed 3714 (88.0) 508 (12.0)
YPC2100 Respondent has had any other treatment to their wisdom teeth when they were
causing pain, like cleaning around the gum or removing part of the gum
3685 (87.3) 537 (12.7)
YPC2110 Respondent ever had mouth ulcers 4053 (96.0) 169 (4.0)
YPC2111 Age when respondent first noticed that they had mouth ulcers (Count excludes those
that answered “Don’t remember to YPC2111, N = 509; Percentage relates to those that
answered “Yes,…” to YPC110, N = 2,870)
2423 (84.4) 447 (15.6)
YPC2112 Frequency respondent gets mouth ulcers (Count excludes those that answered “Don’t
remember to YPC2112, N = 236; Percentage relates to those that answered “Yes,…” to
YPC110, N = 2,870)
2705 (94.3) 165 (5.7)

Dataset validation

The number of valid and missing responses for variables, except those requiring the use of the mouth diagram and mirror (YPC1980-YPC2031 and YPC2040-YPC2043), is shown in Table 15.

During data cleaning it became apparent that some participants (less than 2.2%) had logical contradictions relating to some of the questions about wisdom teeth problems and mouth ulcers. For example some participants indicated they had never had pain from their wisdom teeth but also that they had received treatment, such as gum cleaning, to wisdom teeth when they were causing pain. The importance of these contradictions will differ depending on the research question, to allow researchers the option of including or excluding these responses, the responses were all included in the dataset and new variables were generated to identify those participants with logical contradictions (YPC2113 – YPC2120).

Ethics policies

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the ALSPAC Ethics and Law Committee and the Local Research Ethics Committees.

Data availability

ALSPAC data access is through a system of managed open access. The steps below highlight how to apply for access to the data included in this data note and all other ALSPAC data. The datasets presented in this data note are linked to ALSPAC project number B2415, please quote this project number during your application. The ALSPAC variable codes highlighted in the dataset descriptions can be used to specify required variables.

  • 1.

    Please read the ALSPAC access policy (PDF, 627kB) which describes the process of accessing the data and samples in detail, and outlines the costs associated with doing so.

  • 2.

    You may also find it useful to browse our fully searchable research proposals database, which lists all research projects that have been approved since April 2011.

  • 3.

    Please submit your research proposal for consideration by the ALSPAC Executive Committee. You will receive a response within 10 working days to advise you whether your proposal has been approved.

If you have any questions about accessing data, please email alspac-data@bristol.ac.uk.

The ALSPAC data management plan describes in detail the policy regarding data sharing, which is through a system of managed open access.

Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from the parents of participating children after receiving a full explanation of the study. Children were invited to give assent where appropriate. Study members have the right to withdraw their consent for elements of the study or from the study entirely at any time. Full details of the ALSPAC consent procedures are available of the study website.

Acknowledgements

We are extremely grateful to all the families who took part in this study, the midwives for their help in recruiting them, and the whole ALSPAC team, which includes interviewers, computer and laboratory technicians, clerical workers, research scientists, volunteers, managers, receptionists and nurses.

Funding Statement

This work is supported by the Wellcome Trust [102215], [201237 to TD], [201268 to SH] The UK Medical Research Council and Wellcome (Grant ref: 102215/2/13/2) and the University of Bristol provide core support for ALSPAC. This publication is the work of the authors and Nicholas Timpson will serve as guarantor for the contents of this paper. A comprehensive list of grants funding is available on the ALSPAC website. This research was specifically funded by the Medical Research Council (SSCM.RD1812) and the School or Oral and Dental Sciences (now the Bristol Dental School), University of Bristol (ORDS.DF3517).

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

[version 2; referees: 2 approved]

Supplementary material

Supplementary File 1. Me @ 23 questionnaire. Section J: Teeth.

Pdf version of the relevant questionnaire section.

References

  • 1. Boyd A, Golding J, Macleod J, et al. : Cohort Profile: the 'children of the 90s'--the index offspring of the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(1):111–127. 10.1093/ije/dys064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Fraser A, Macdonald-Wallis C, Tilling K, et al. : Cohort Profile: The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children: ALSPAC mothers cohort. Int J Epidemiol. 2013;42(1):97–110. 10.1093/ije/dys066 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. The National Facial Oral and Oculoplastic Research Centre: National 3rd Molar (Wisdom Tooth) Audit (N3MA). (Accessed: 29th January 2018). Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. : Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42(2):377–81. 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Wellcome Open Res. 2018 May 4. doi: 10.21956/wellcomeopenres.15869.r33009

Referee response for version 2

W Murray Thomson 1

The AU have done a nice job. My concern with the sentence about data collection was that it actually refers to data collection being collected - which remains awkward. Once that is fixed up (we collect data; we don't "collect data collection"...), the paper will be ready. I do not need to see this again.

I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Wellcome Open Res. 2018 Apr 19. doi: 10.21956/wellcomeopenres.15404.r32906

Referee response for version 1

W Murray Thomson 1

Overall comments

This is a useful data note. The actual writing could do with some close editing. The last sentence of the Abstract is particularly badly worded. The 4 research questions in the Introduction are also poorly worded, particularly the phrases “start to accurately predict” (maybe never?) and “start to predict”.

Paras 2 and 3 of the Methods are on the same topic and should be combined. Para 7 – “data collection … were collected” is awkward.

Re the Tables – “dont” should be “don’t”. And hyphenate “check up”.

Is the rationale for creating the dataset(s) clearly described?

Yes

Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes – insofar as the limitations of such limited self-report oral health data permit, of course. It would be useful to have some indication of the validity of the self-report tooth presence data – the AU could obtain such data with another, smaller sample which was then clinically examined by calibrated dental examiners. People will find it more straightforward to publish the data from the parent study if such information is available, so it would be a sound investment of time and money.

Are sufficient details of methods and materials provided to allow replication by others?

Yes.

Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Mostly. It would be useful to have a Table summarising the missing data; that is, a Table listing each variable and the number of valid and missing responses so that the reader could see it at a glance.

The % in Tables 4 and 5 should be presented to only 1 decimal place (as in the other Tables). Using 2 implies a degree of accuracy which is inappropriate here. In Tables 4 and 5, FDI tooth notation should be used, so that “UR1” becomes tooth 11, etc. The column headings “Right and “Left” should be centred.

I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

Wellcome Open Res. 2018 Apr 26.
Tom Dudding 1

We thank the referee for their helpful comments and provide a point-by-point response.

  1. The actual writing could do with some close editing. The last sentence of the Abstract is particularly badly worded. The 4 research questions in the Introduction are also poorly worded, particularly the phrases “start to accurately predict” (maybe never?) and “start to predict”.

Reply: We have edited the manuscript to amend those areas where there is poor wording. The final line of the abstract now reads “This round of data collection follows on from similar questionnaires at ages 7, 10 and 17 years. The ALSPAC study provides an opportunity to combine this oral health data with extensive prospective phenotype, genetic, epigenetic and metabolomic data from the participants, their mothers and fathers.” The first and third research question have been re-phrased to “Can oral health in adolescence predict poor health outcomes in later life and if so at what stage is this detectable?” and “At what stage do oral hygiene behaviours and beliefs predict periodontal outcomes? Are patterns of behaviour in childhood or early adult life more important?” respectively.

  1. Paras 2 and 3 of the Methods are on the same topic and should be combined. Para 7 – “data collection … were collected” is awkward.

Reply: We have combined paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Methods and reworded paragraph 7 to read “..data collection for the online questionnaires was collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools…”

  1. Re the Tables – “dont” should be “don’t”. And hyphenate “check up”.

Reply: In all tables “dont” has been replaced by “don’t” and “check up” is now hyphenated in table 2.

  1. Are the protocols appropriate and is the work technically sound?

    Yes – insofar as the limitations of such limited self-report oral health data permit, of course. It would be useful to have some indication of the validity of the self-report tooth presence data – the AU could obtain such data with another, smaller sample which was then clinically examined by calibrated dental examiners. People will find it more straightforward to publish the data from the parent study if such information is available, so it would be a sound investment of time and money.

Reply: We thank the referee for this comment and agree that this dataset would be improved by validating it against a clinical sample. Although this is not possible for this round of data collection the authors would like to carry out a clinical validation of the next round of oral health questionnaires in the ALSPAC study.

  1. Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format?

Mostly. It would be useful to have a Table summarising the missing data; that is, a Table listing each variable and the number of valid and missing responses so that the reader could see it at a glance.

Reply: We have added a table (Table 14) to the revised data note that provides the number and percentage of valid and missing responses to each question other than those summarised in Table 4 (reported frequency of fillings and extractions) and Table 5 (wisdom teeth). These variables have not been included in Table 14 as no information additional to Tables 4 and 5 would be presented.

  1. The % in Tables 4 and 5 should be presented to only 1 decimal place (as in the other Tables). Using 2 implies a degree of accuracy which is inappropriate here. In Tables 4 and 5, FDI tooth notation should be used, so that “UR1” becomes tooth 11, etc. The column headings “Right and “Left” should be centred.

Reply: We have altered tables 4 and 5 to present the data to 1 decimal place. Thank you for your comment regarding using the FDI notation, we feel this is a valuable addition to the table. We have decided to include it in addition to, as opposed to instead of, the letters and numbers notation, as we feel this latter notation is more useful to non-dentally trained users. The column headers “Left” and “Right” have been centred.

Wellcome Open Res. 2018 Apr 19. doi: 10.21956/wellcomeopenres.15404.r32474

Referee response for version 1

Thomas Dietrich 1

This manuscript describes an oral health related follow-up questionnaire collecting self-reported  data on dental attendance, tooth restorations and extractions, third molars and mouth ulcers up to 4,222 from participants in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), who are now approximately 23 years of age. The rationale, items and basic response frequencies are clearly describes and so is the accessibility of this resource. The authors may wish to consider to add a flow-chart describing how they arrived at the final sample size for this round of follow-up, as the description in the text is at times hard to follow.

I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Wellcome Open Res. 2018 Apr 26.
Tom Dudding 1

We thank the referee for their comments and the suggestion of the addition of a flow-chart to clearly show the final sample size. This has now been added as an additional figure (Figure 1).

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Data Availability Statement

    ALSPAC data access is through a system of managed open access. The steps below highlight how to apply for access to the data included in this data note and all other ALSPAC data. The datasets presented in this data note are linked to ALSPAC project number B2415, please quote this project number during your application. The ALSPAC variable codes highlighted in the dataset descriptions can be used to specify required variables.

    • 1.

      Please read the ALSPAC access policy (PDF, 627kB) which describes the process of accessing the data and samples in detail, and outlines the costs associated with doing so.

    • 2.

      You may also find it useful to browse our fully searchable research proposals database, which lists all research projects that have been approved since April 2011.

    • 3.

      Please submit your research proposal for consideration by the ALSPAC Executive Committee. You will receive a response within 10 working days to advise you whether your proposal has been approved.

    If you have any questions about accessing data, please email alspac-data@bristol.ac.uk.

    The ALSPAC data management plan describes in detail the policy regarding data sharing, which is through a system of managed open access.


    Articles from Wellcome Open Research are provided here courtesy of The Wellcome Trust

    RESOURCES