Next Article in Journal
Latent Classes of Adverse and Benevolent Childhood Experiences in a Multinational Sample of Parents and Their Relation to Parent, Child, and Family Functioning during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Previous Article in Journal
Differences in Race Characteristics between World-Class Individual-Medley and Stroke-Specialist Swimmers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 19
Issue 20
10.3390/ijerph192013580
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Trends in Self-Rated Oral Health and Its Associations with Oral Health Status and Oral Health Behaviors in Japanese University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study from 2011 to 2019

by
Momoko Nakahara
1,
Naoki Toyama
2,
Daisuke Ekuni
2,*,
Noriko Takeuchi
3,
Takayuki Maruyama
2,
Aya Yokoi
2,
Daiki Fukuhara
3,
Nanami Sawada
3,
Yukiho Nakashima
3 and
Manabu Morita
2
1
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama 700-8558, Japan
2
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Academic Field of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama 700-8558, Japan
3
Department of Preventive Dentistry, Okayama University Hospital, Okayama 700-8558, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(20), 13580; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192013580
Submission received: 3 October 2022 / Revised: 17 October 2022 / Accepted: 18 October 2022 / Published: 20 October 2022
(This article belongs to the Topic Oral Health Management for Children, Adolescents, and Adults)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Self-rated oral health (SROH) is a valid, comprehensive indicator of oral health status. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to analyze how oral health behaviors and clinical oral status were associated with SROH and how they had changed over the course of nine years in Japanese university students. Data were obtained from 17,996 students who underwent oral examinations and completed self-questionnaires from 2011 to 2019. Oral status was assessed using the decayed and filled teeth scores, bleeding on probing (BOP), probing pocket depth, the Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S), oral health behaviors, and related factors. SROH improved from 2011 to 2019. The logistic regression model showed that university students who were female and had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing, no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score and were significantly more likely to report very good, good, or fair SROH. An interaction effect was observed between survey year and regular dental check-ups (year × regular dental check-ups). The improvement trend in SROH might be associated with changes in oral health behaviors and oral health status.

1. Introduction

Self-rated oral health (SROH) is a valid, comprehensive indicator of overall oral health status, and it is often assessed in epidemiological studies [1,2,3]. In recent years, it has been recognized that clinical measures of oral health should be supplemented by subjective assessment of oral symptoms to improve both the quality of dental care and people’s satisfaction [4,5]. SROH is a relatively simple indicator and may be an easy and useful method for collecting dental information and planning health promotion interventions [1,2,3,6,7,8]. Based on the results of previous studies, surveillance of oral health should include SROH [1,9,10].
Previous studies reported that SROH was associated with a variety of factors, including demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors, objective oral health, and oral health awareness [11]. SROH was also associated with clinical conditions [decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT), gingival bleeding, and periodontal pockets], and oral symptoms (oral pain, tooth sensitivity, bad breath, and difficulty in speaking) [1,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. Several oral health behaviors such as dental attendance and tooth brushing were associated with SROH [12,18,19]. Furthermore, poor SROH was a predictor of five-year and ten-year tooth loss [20].
In recent years, dental caries and oral health behaviors have been getting better in the Japanese population based on the National Survey of Dental Diseases in Japan [21,22]. The proportion of people aged 15–19 years with decayed teeth and the average DMFT score of people aged 15–24 years have decreased from 2011 to 2016, especially in young adults [21,22]. In addition, the percentage of people aged 1 to 85 and over who brushed their teeth more than once a day has increased from 2011 to 2016. Thus, SROH might be getting better over time. However, few studies have investigated recent changes and trends in SROH in Japanese young adults.
Many young university students live away from parental supervision for the first time. Therefore, they can easily change their health and lifestyle behaviors [1,9]. University students’ household type was directly associated with regular dental check-ups and indirectly contributed to gingival status [23]. Some previous studies reported that oral health behaviors such as tooth brushing, use of dental floss, and regular dental check-ups affected oral hygiene and periodontal status in university students and adults [24,25]. Poor oral health behaviors related to tooth brushing and dental check-ups can easily cause poor clinical status, which may lead to a vicious circle that negatively affects SROH.
We hypothesized that SROH changes over time, and oral health behaviors and oral health status influence changes in SROH of Japanese university students. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to analyze the trends in SROH and how oral health behaviors and oral health status are associated with changes in the SROH of Japanese university students.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Ethics Statement

The protocol of this study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences (No. 1060). All methods were performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained verbally from each participant. This study conformed with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.

2.2. Study Population

First-year students volunteered to undergo oral examinations and answer self-administered questionnaires at Okayama University in April from 2011 to 2019. Participants were recruited from all faculties (Faculties of Letters, Education, Law, Economics, Science, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Engineering, Environmental Science and Technology, Agriculture, Medicine, and Dentistry). Inclusion criteria were: students who agreed to participate in the study; students who provided complete data for both the oral examination and the questionnaires; and students who were 18 or 19 years old, in order to avoid age-related factors [1,2,9,25]. Exclusion criteria were students aged ≥ 20 years old and those who provided incomplete data. It was widely promoted to students to undergo oral examinations each year, and all participants who matched the inclusion criteria were included to minimize selection bias.

2.3. Self-Questionnaires

The self-administered questionnaire was delivered to each student before participating in oral examinations. In addition to sex and age, the self-administered questionnaires included the following items. The students were asked about the following oral health behaviors: daily frequency of tooth brushing (≥two times/≤one time); use of dental floss (yes/no); and undergoing regular dental check-ups (yes/no) [1,2,9,25]. The SROH was assessed by responses to the question: “In general, how do you consider your oral health?”. The participants chose one of the following responses: “very good”, “good”, “fair”, “poor”, or “very poor” [1,2,9]. The “very good”, “good”, and “fair” responses were combined to represent “good SROH”, and the “poor” and “very poor” responses were combined to represent “poor SROH” [2].

2.4. Oral Examination

Nine qualified dentists (D.E., N.T. (Noriko Takeuchi), T.M., A.Y., D.F., N.T. (Naoki Toyama), N.S., Y.N., and M.N.) conducted oral examinations. Dental caries status was evaluated using the decayed teeth and filled scores [26]. Periodontal status was assessed using the community periodontal index (CPI) [26]. For periodontal examination, the following ten teeth were selected: two molars in each posterior sextant and the upper right and lower left central incisors. A CPI probe (YDM, Tokyo, Japan) was used to measure each tooth at six sites (mesiobuccal, mid-buccal, distobuccal, distolingual, mid-lingual, and mesiolingual) for measurement of probing pocket depth (PPD) and bleeding on probing (BOP). Periodontal disease was defined as PPD ≥ 4 mm (CPI pocket score = 1 or 2). The level of dental plaque and calculus was assessed using the Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S) [27]. The OHI-S was dichotomized with a median of 0.33 (good ≤ 0.33; poor > 0.33) [28]. Calibration among the nine dentists was performed before the oral examinations, and the intra- and inter-examiner reliabilities as evaluated by κ statistics were both > 0.8.

2.5. Statistical Analyses

SPSS (version 25; IBM, Tokyo, Japan) was used for all statistical analyses, with a two-sided p-value < 0.05 considered to indicate significance. First, using the combined data from 2011 to 2019, significant differences between the good SROH group and the poor SROH group were determined by a chi-squared test. Second, odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a logistic regression model (a forward selection method) [29], to evaluate the associations of good SROH with categorical factors: sex, daily frequency of tooth brushing, use of dental floss, regular dental check-ups, BOP, PPD, the numbers of decayed and filled teeth, and the OHI-S. These independent variables were selected based on the p-value (<0.20) on the chi-squared test, because it has been suggested that potential confounders should be eliminated only for a p-value > 0.20 to prevent residual confounding [30]. Third, associations of good SROH with seven categorical factors were investigated on a yearly basis based on the result of the second analysis. Finally, associations of good SROH with these seven categorical factors were confirmed considering the survey year effect and their possible interactions with survey year (year × sex, year × daily frequency of tooth brushing, year × regular dental check-ups, year × BOP, year × decayed teeth, year × filled teeth, and year × OHI-S). This analysis investigated whether factor effects related to SROH changed over time across the surveys [29]. The survey years from 2011 to 2019 were coded from one to nine and considered continuous variables.

3. Results

A total of 20,090 students underwent voluntary oral examinations and answered self-administered questionnaires from 2011 to 2019. Of these students, 2094 were excluded for the following reasons: age ≥ 20 years (n = 1003) and providing incomplete data (n = 1091). Finally, the data of 17,996 students (89.6%) were analyzed.
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the participants. This study analyzed data from 17,996 participants (10,142 males and 7854 females; age 18–19 years). Approximately 2000 students participated each year. Proportions of “very good”, “good”, “fair”, “poor” and “very poor” for SROH tended to improve from 4.7%, 17.8%, 51.4%, 22.4%, and 3.7%, respectively, in 2011 (n = 2077) to 15.1%, 28.5%, 41.7%, 13.1%, and 1.6%, respectively, in 2019 (n = 2019) (Figure 1). In addition, an improving trend was seen in the proportions of students who had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing (81.1% in 2011 and 89.8% in 2019), used dental floss (4.9% in 2011 and 28.9% in 2019), and underwent regular dental check-ups (14.4% in 2011 and 33.3% in 2019). The improving trend was also seen in the proportions of students without BOP (23.4% in 2011 and 26.6% in 2019), decayed teeth (83.7% in 2011 and 91.8% in 2019), and filled teeth (44.2% in 2011 and 56.5% in 2019). The OHI-S median score also improved from 0.67 in 2011 to 0.33 in 2019.
Table 2 shows the comparison between the good SROH group and the poor SROH group. The good SROH group included 14,671 (81.5%) participants. Significant differences in sex, daily frequency of tooth brushing, use of dental floss, regular dental check-ups, BOP, decayed teeth, filled teeth, and OHI-S were observed between the two groups (all p < 0.01). Students who were female, had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing, used dental floss, underwent regular dental check-ups, had no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score reported good SROH significantly more than the others.
As shown in Table 3, the logistic regression analysis showed that students who were female had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing, underwent regular dental check-ups, had no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score reported good SROH significantly more than the others (all p < 0.01). Table 4 shows that good SROH was significantly associated with daily frequency of tooth brushing, decayed teeth, filled teeth, and OHI-S (all p < 0.05), which was consistent in each year. On the other hand, sex, regular dental check-ups, and BOP showed inconsistent results depending on the survey year.
Table 5 shows that students who were female, had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing, had no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score reported good SROH significantly more than the others (all p < 0.01). In addition, good SROH was significantly associated with survey year. The result indicates that the more recent the survey year, the more students reported good SROH.
To investigate whether the factors related to SROH changed over time, interaction effects between factors and survey year were confirmed. An interaction effect between survey year and regular dental check-ups (year × regular dental check-ups: p = 0.002) was observed. Therefore, predicted probabilities were plotted with the interaction effect in Figure 2. The interaction effect between regular dental check-ups and survey year showed that the regular dental check-up effect varied according to the survey year. Students undergoing regular dental check-ups had higher probabilities of reporting good oral health than those not. The difference between students undergoing regular dental check-ups and those not decreased from 2011 to 2019.

4. Discussion

In the present study, the percentage of good SROH students increased over the last nine years. In addition, an interaction effect between survey year and regular dental check-ups (year × regular dental check-ups) was observed in university students. Students who were female, had a high daily frequency of tooth brushing, had no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score reported good SROH significantly more than other students. To the best of our knowledge, this was the first cross-sectional study to investigate the trends in SROH and how oral health behaviors and oral health status are associated with changes in SROH of Japanese university students. The improvement trend in SROH might be associated with changes in oral health behaviors and oral health status.
In 2019, 1721 (85.2%) participants had very good, good or fair SROH. According to recent studies [11,31], this value was higher than the data of people aged 20–29 years old in the United States in 2017–2018 (75.3%), aged 20–29 years old in Korea in 2016–2018 (78.0%), and aged 15–34 years old in Australia in 2017–2018 (81.6%). This discrepancy might be due to the differences in sample sizes and age groups. In addition, these studies categorized excellent, very good, and good into good SROH and fair and poor into poor SROH in the United States and Australia [11,31]. However, the present study categorized very good, good, and fair into good SROH based on a previous study of Japanese university students [2]. On the other hand, the present results were similar to the overall results of the study in Canada in 2013–2014 (85.2%), although the subgroup (15–19 years old) of Canadian people showed a relatively higher percentage of good SROH (92.2%) [32]. Taken together, the percentage of good SROH people in the present study was within the same range of the other developed countries.
An improving trend was also seen in oral health behaviors such as daily frequency of tooth brushing and oral health status such as BOP, decayed teeth, filled teeth, and the OHI-S score. Previous studies showed that clinical oral status (decayed teeth, filled teeth, and gingival status such as BOP and PPD) was a predictor of SROH [1,6,13,14,15,16,17,33,34,35]. Thus, the good SROH seen in the later years might be associated with perceived improvements in oral health status and oral health behaviors.
During the study period, the students who underwent regular dental check-ups had higher probabilities of reporting good oral health than those without. This result is similar to the previous studies suggesting that regular dental check-ups are associated with SROH [1,36]. However, a significant interaction effect between regular dental check-ups and survey year was observed, which indicated that the regular dental check-up effect varied according to the survey year. The predicted probabilities of reporting good SROH suggested that the difference in SROH between students with and without regular dental check-ups decreased from 2011 to 2019. Compared to 2011, the percentage of students with regular dental check-ups increased in 2019. Thus, as more students had regular dental check-ups, the impact of regular dental check-ups on SROH diminished (Table 5 and Figure 2).
In agreement with some studies [1,6,13,14,15,16,17,33,34], students without decayed and filled teeth had better SROH in the present study. Of the independent variables related to SROH, the number of decayed and filled teeth showed the highest OR (Table 5). This consistent association was confirmed when performing logistic regression analysis for each year. The interaction effects between the number of decayed and filled teeth and survey year were not observed in the final analysis, which indicated the strong and consistent association of decayed and filled teeth with SROH during the survey year. A high DMFT score is correlated with anxiety [37], and anxiety affects SROH [2]. Thus, anxiety associated with caries might strongly influence SROH. In addition, dental caries and related complications cause pain and result in visible tooth defects. Therefore, the increasing trend of caries-free students might be strongly associated with the improving trend in SROH.
The present study found that SROH was associated with the daily frequency of tooth brushing and the OHI-S score. These results were partly similar to those of other studies that found that inadequate tooth brushing was associated with poor SROH [5,18,38]. According to previous studies, tooth brushing, the use of dental floss, and regular dental check-ups were significantly associated with good oral hygiene status in Japanese university students [25]. Therefore, the OHI-S score, which indicates clinical oral hygiene status, might affect SROH.
SROH was associated with clinical gingival status (BOP). Previous research showed that SROH and self-reported periodontal health were significantly associated with BOP and the number of deep periodontal pockets [13,17,35]. Those reports supported the present finding. In addition, previous studies indicated a significant association between oral hygiene status and BOP in university students [25,39]. Gingivitis is caused by the continuous accumulation of dental plaque [40]. Although OHI-S and BOP may have mutual effects on SROH, further studies are needed to investigate how accurately university students recognize oral hygiene and gingival bleeding and how that recognition is reflected in SROH.
In addition, in the present results, the CPI score did not show a significant effect on SROH. This result was partly consistent with previous studies in which periodontal variables such as PPD did not agree well with self-assessment [3,41]. A simple question, “In general, how do you consider your oral health?” was used in the present study. It may be more unreliable than a detailed question, such as “Have you ever been told by a dentist that you have gum-related problems?” [17,42]. The more detailed question may lead to students’ self-assessments of periodontal status conforming more to clinical results.
Contrary to some previous studies [13,17], female students reported that their oral health was good more than male students. This result is not surprising given that female students were significantly more likely to have high daily frequency of tooth brushing, regular dental check-ups, no BOP, and a low OHI-S score (chi-squared test, all p < 0.001). The present results were consistent with some previous results [6,29,32,43,44]. Potential mechanisms have been proposed to explain differences of health status between the sexes, such as differences in lifestyle and access to dental care [32]. However, the mechanisms remain unclear. Further research will be needed to investigate the contribution of sex to oral health inequality.
The results of this study might be clinically beneficial. Understanding factors related to SROH helps dentists determine what aspects of oral health are important for people [45]. Because SROH may affect quality of life and oral health-related quality of life, factors related to SROH should be controlled at an early life stage to ensure the health of students [1,3,9,46,47]. Not only early detection of dental diseases, but also control of SROH might contribute to improving the quality of life of young people.
This study had several limitations. First, this was a cross-sectional study. To develop a better model, a prospective cohort study and an interventional study would be needed. Further studies will be important to investigate whether the improvement of factors related to SROH contributes to the improvement of SROH or quality of life. Second, factors that might be associated with SROH, such as socioeconomic status [14,48], social capital [2], psychosocial factors [6,49], and systemic conditions [50,51], were not considered. In addition, according to the Japanese School Health Survey in 2019 [52], there are differences in the proportion of students aged 5–17 years with decayed teeth among the surveyed regions. However, we did not investigate the hometown of the participants. Future studies are needed to examine their effects. Third, only ten teeth were examined in the gingival examination because of time constraints, which might have led to under- or over-estimation. There may be a bias that a full examination of all teeth for BOP and PPD could avoid. Fourth, the existence of subjective oral symptoms, such as pain due to dental caries or temporomandibular joint disorders, was not investigated. However, in the present study, few students actually consulted the dentist about oral pain in the oral examination setting, which suggests that the present results may be relatively unaffected by this limitation. Fifth, we did not conduct a transgender-sensitive questionnaire. A previous study showed that oral health in a transgender group was different [53]. Thus, future studies are needed to examine their associations. Finally, all participants were recruited from Okayama University students. This might limit the ability to extrapolate these findings to the general population.

5. Conclusions

The percentage of students with very good or good SROH increased from 2011 to 2019. Very good, good, or fair SROH was significantly associated with survey year, and an interaction effect between survey year and regular dental check-ups (year × regular dental check-ups) was observed in university students. Japanese university students who were female, had high daily frequency of tooth brushing, no BOP, no decayed teeth, no filled teeth, and a low OHI-S score were significantly more likely to report very good, good, or fair SROH. The improvement trend in SROH might be associated with changes in oral health behaviors and oral health status.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.N., D.E. and M.M.; methodology, M.N., D.E. and M.M.; validation, M.N.; formal analysis, M.N.; investigation, M.N., N.T. (Naoki Toyama), D.E., N.T. (Noriko Takeuchi), T.M., A.Y., D.F., N.S. and Y.N.; resources, M.M.; data curation, M.N., N.T. (Naoki Toyama) and D.E.; writing—original draft preparation, M.N.; writing—review and editing, all authors; visualization, M.M.; supervision, M.M.; project administration, M.M.; funding acquisition, M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences (No. 1060).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

All the relevant data are included in the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the work of past and present members of our laboratory for their cooperation in recruiting participants.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Kojima, A.; Ekuni, D.; Mizutani, S.; Furuta, M.; Irie, K.; Azuma, T.; Tomofuji, T.; Iwasaki, Y.; Morita, M. Relationships between self-rated oral health, subjective symptoms, oral health behavior and clinical conditions in Japanese university students: A cross-sectional survey at Okayama University. BMC Oral Health 2013, 13, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Furuta, M.; Ekuni, D.; Takao, S.; Suzuki, E.; Morita, M.; Kawachi, I. Social capital and self-rated oral health among young people. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2011, 40, 97–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ueno, M.; Zaitsu, T.; Ohara, S.; Wright, C.; Kawaguchi, Y. Factors influencing perceived oral health of japanese middle-aged adults. Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2011, 27, NP2296–NP2304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Locker, D.; Allen, F. What do measures of “oral health-related quality of life” measure? Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2007, 35, 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Bado, F.M.R.; De Checchi, M.H.R.; Cortellazzi, K.L.; Ju, X.; Jamieson, L.; Mialhe, F.L. Oral health literacy, self-rated oral health, and oral health-related quality of life in Brazilian adults. Eur. J. Oral Sci. 2020, 128, 218–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pattussi, M.P.; Olinto, M.T.A.; Hardy, R.; Sheiham, A. Clinical, social and psychosocial factors associated with self-rated oral health in Brazilian adolescents. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2007, 35, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Åstrøm, A.N.; Mashoto, K. Determinants of self-rated oral health status among school children in northern Tanzania. Int. J. Paediatr. Dent. 2002, 12, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Locker, D. Applications of self-reported assessments of oral health outcomes. J. Dent. Educ. 1996, 60, 494–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Yamane-Takeuchi, M.; Ekuni, D.; Mizutani, S.; Kataoka, K.; Taniguchi-Tabata, A.; Azuma, T.; Furuta, M.; Tomofuji, T.; Iwasaki, Y.; Morita, M. Associations among oral health-related quality of life, subjective symptoms, clinical status, and self-rated oral health in Japanese university students: A cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2016, 16, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Ostberg, A.-L.; Eriksson, B.; Lindblad, U.; Halling, A. Epidemiological dental indices and self-perceived oral health in adolescents: Ecological aspects. Acta Odontol. Scand. 2003, 61, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Choi, J.-A.; Mun, S.-J.; Chung, W.-G.; Han, S.-Y. Differences in Determinants Influencing Self-Rated Oral Health in Korean and American Adults. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Jayasvasti, I.; Htun, K.C.S.S.; Peltzer, K. Self-Rated Oral Health Status And Social And Health Determinants Among 35–65 Year-Old Persons In One Region In Myanmar: A Cross-Sectional Study. Clin. Cosmet. Investig. Dent. 2019, 11, 339–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Bhat, M.; Bhat, S.; Roberts-Thomson, K.; Do, L. Self-Rated Oral Health and Associated Factors among an Adult Population in Rural India—An Epidemiological Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 6414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Pattussi, M.P.; Peres, K.G.; Boing, A.F.; Peres, M.A.; Da Costa, J.S.D. Self-rated oral health and associated factors in Brazilian elders. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2010, 38, 348–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Arantes, R.; Fraz, P. Subjective oral symptoms associated with self-rated oral health among Indigenous groups in Central-West Brazil. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2018, 46, 352–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Martínez-Beneyto, Y.; Vera-Delgado, M.V.; Pérez, L.; Maurandi, A. Self-reported oral health and hygiene habits, dental decay, and periodontal condition among pregnant European women. Int. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2011, 114, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Blizniuk, A.; Ueno, M.; Zaitsu, T.; Kawaguchi, Y. Association between self-reported and clinical oral health status in Belarusian adults. J. Investig. Clin. Dent. 2017, 8, e12206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Olutola, B.G.; Ayo-Yusuf, O.A. Socio-Environmental Factors Associated with Self-Rated Oral Health in South Africa: A Multilevel Effects Model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2012, 9, 3465–3483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Cárdenas-Bahena, Á.; Velázquez-Olmedo, L.B.; Falcón-Flores, J.A.; García-Zámano, I.E.; Montes-Salmerón, R.E.; Reza-Bravo, G.G.; Sánchez-García, S. Self-perception of oral health in older adults from Mexico City. Rev. Med. Inst. Mex. Seguro Soc. 2018, 56 (Suppl. 1), S54–S63. (In Spanish) [Google Scholar]
  20. Meisel, P.; Holtfreter, B.; Völzke, H.; Kocher, T. Self-reported oral health predicts tooth loss after five and ten years in a population-based study. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2018, 45, 1164–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Japanese National Survey of Dental Diseases in 2011. Available online: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/list/62-23.html (accessed on 11 July 2022).
  22. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Japanese National Survey of Dental Diseases in 2016. Available online: https://www.mhlw.go.jp/toukei/list/62-28.html (accessed on 11 July 2022).
  23. Nakahara, M.; Ekuni, D.; Kataoka, K.; Yokoi, A.; Uchida-Fukuhara, Y.; Fukuhara, D.; Kobayashi, T.; Toyama, N.; Saho, H.; Islam, M.; et al. Living with Family Is Directly Associated with Regular Dental Checkup and Indirectly Associated with Gingival Status among Japanese University Students: A 3-Year Cohort Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Lang, W.P.; Farghaly, M.M.; Ronis, D.L. The relation of preventive dental behaviors to periodontal health status. J. Clin. Periodontol. 1994, 21, 194–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Furuta, M.; Ekuni, D.; Irie, K.; Azuma, T.; Tomofuji, T.; Ogura, T.; Morita, M. Sex Differences in Gingivitis Relate to Interaction of Oral Health Behaviors in Young People. J. Periodontol. 2011, 82, 558–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. World Health Organization. Oral Health Surveys: Basic Methods—5th Edition. Published 12 November 2013. Available online: https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789241548649 (accessed on 10 July 2022).
  27. Greene, J.C.; Vermillion, J.R. The Simplified Oral Hygiene Index. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1964, 68, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Amarasena, G.; Ekanayake, L. Periodontal status and associated factors in 15-year-old Sri Lankans. J. Investig. Clin. Dent. 2010, 1, 74–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Li, K.Y.; Okunseri, C.E.; McGrath, C.; Wong, M.C. Trends in self-reported oral health of US adults: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2014. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2018, 46, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Maldonado, G.; Greenland, S. Simulation Study of Confounder-Selection Strategies. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1993, 138, 923–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Brennan, D.S.; Luzzi, L.; Chrisopoulos, S.; Haag, D.G. Oral health impacts among Australian adults in the National Study of Adult Oral Health (NSAOH) 2017–18. Aust. Dent. J. 2020, 65 (Suppl. 1), S59–S66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fang, C.; Aldossri, M.; Farmer, J.; Gomaa, N.; Quiñonez, C.; Ravaghi, V. Changes in income-related inequalities in oral health status in Ontario, Canada. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2021, 49, 110–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kim, M.-J.; Lim, C.-Y. Correlation of Self-Perceived Oral Health Status and Objective Oral Health Status of Adults. J. Korea Acad.-Ind. Coop. Soc. 2017, 18, 375–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jeong, H.J.; Lee, J.H. The association of subjective oral health awareness with dental caries, dental prostheses, periodontal status of Korean adults. J. Korean Acad. Oral Health 2019, 43, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pinelli, C.; Castro Monteiro Loffredo, L. Reproducibility and validity of self-perceived oral health conditions. Clin. Oral Investig. 2007, 11, 431–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Thomson, W.M.; Williams, S.M.; Broadbent, J.; Poulton, R.; Locker, D. Long-term Dental Visiting Patterns and Adult Oral Health. J. Dent. Res. 2010, 89, 307–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Samorodnitzky, G.R.; Levin, L. Self-Assessed Dental Status, Oral Behavior, DMF, and Dental Anxiety. J. Dent. Educ. 2005, 69, 1385–1389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Polo, C.; Montero, J. Sociodemographic, Educational, Behavioral, and Psychologic Factors Underlying Orofacial Esthetics and Self-Reported Oral Health. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2017, 28, 47–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Mizutani, S.; Ekuni, D.; Furuta, M.; Tomofuji, T.; Irie, K.; Azuma, T.; Kojima, A.; Nagase, J.; Iwasaki, Y.; Morita, M. Effects of self-efficacy on oral health behaviours and gingival health in university students aged 18- or 19-years-old. J. Clin. Periodontol. 2012, 39, 844–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Pihlstrom, B.L.; Michalowicz, B.S.; Johnson, N.W. Periodontal diseases. Lancet 2005, 366, 1809–1820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Buhlin, K.; Gustafsson, A.; Andersson, K.; Håkansson, J.; Klinge, B. Validity and limitations of self-reported periodontal health. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2002, 30, 431–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Blicher, B.; Joshipura, K.; Eke, P. Validation of self-reported periodontal disease: A systematic review. J. Dent. Res. 2005, 84, 881–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hadler-Olsen, E.; Jönsson, B. Oral health and use of dental services in different stages of adulthood in Norway: A cross sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2021, 21, 257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Tsuboya, T.; Aida, J.; Kawachi, I.; Katase, K.; Osaka, K. Early life-course socioeconomic position, adult work-related factors and oral health disparities: Cross-sectional analysis of the J-SHINE study. BMJ Open 2014, 4, e005701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gilbert, G.H.; Duncan, R.P.; Heft, M.W.; Dolan, T.A.; Vogel, W.B. Multidimensionality of oral health in dentate adults. Med. Care 1998, 36, 988–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Ng, S.T.; Tengku-Aizan, H.; Tey, N.P. Perceived health status and daily activity participation of older Malaysians. Asia-Pac. J. Public Health 2011, 23, 470–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Mariño, R.; Schofield, M.; Wright, C. Self-reported and clinically determined oral health status predictors for quality of life in dentate older migrant adults. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 2008, 36, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mejia, G.; Armfield, J.M.; Jamieson, L.M. Self-rated oral health and oral health-related factors: The role of social inequality. Aust. Dent. J. 2014, 59, 226–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. De Andrade, F.B.; Lebrão, M.L.; Santos, J.L.F.; Duarte, Y.A.D.O.; Teixeira, D.S.D.C. Factors related to poor self-perceived oral health among community-dwelling elderly individuals in São Paulo, Brazil. Cad. Saude Publica 2012, 28, 1965–1975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Jang, Y.; Choi, E.Y.; Yoon, H.; Park, N.S.; Chiriboga, D.A.; Kim, M.T. Self-rated Physical, Mental, Oral, and Cognitive Health in Older Korean Immigrants: The Role of Health Indicators and Sociocultural Factors. J. Immigr. Minor. Health 2021, 23, 689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Han, A.; Shin, M.; Yang, J.H.; Choi, C.K.; Koh, J.; Kim, O. Body mass index and self-rated oral health in Korean adults in 2017. Gerodontology 2022. Online ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. Japanese National Survey for School Health in 2019; Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology: Tokyo, Japan, 2019.
  53. Manpreet, K.; Ajmal, M.B.; Raheel, S.A.; Saleem, M.C.; Mubeen, K.; Gaballah, K.; Faden, A.; Kujan, O. Oral health status among transgender young adults: A cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2021, 21, 575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 19 13580 g001 550
Figure 1. Self-rated oral health status of Japanese university students from 2011 to 2019.
Figure 1. Self-rated oral health status of Japanese university students from 2011 to 2019.
Ijerph 19 13580 g001
Ijerph 19 13580 g002 550
Figure 2. Predicted probability of reporting very good, good, or fair self-rated oral health status in relation to regular dental check-ups and survey year; when sex, tooth brushing (daily frequency), bleeding on probing (BOP), decayed teeth, filled teeth, and Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S) were selected as independent variables in Japanese university students from 2011 to 2019.
Figure 2. Predicted probability of reporting very good, good, or fair self-rated oral health status in relation to regular dental check-ups and survey year; when sex, tooth brushing (daily frequency), bleeding on probing (BOP), decayed teeth, filled teeth, and Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S) were selected as independent variables in Japanese university students from 2011 to 2019.
Ijerph 19 13580 g002
Table
Table 1. Participants’ characteristics (n = 17,996), Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Table 1. Participants’ characteristics (n = 17,996), Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Parameter Year
201120122013201420152016201720182019
Number of people surveyed 2077 119742025205320161958197419002019
Age (y)181752 (84.4) 21637 (82.9)1613 (79.7)1609 (78.4)1646 (81.6)1635 (83.5)1620 (82.1)1603 (84.4)1666 (82.5)
19325 (15.6)337 (17.1)412 (20.3)444 (21.6)370 (18.4)323 (16.5)354 (17.9)297 (15.6)353 (17.5)
SexMale1173 (56.5)1117 (56.6)1162 (57.4)1172 (57.1)1153 (57.2)1057 (54.0)1111 (56.3)1041 (54.8)1156 (57.3)
Female904 (43.5)857 (43.4)863 (42.6)881 (42.9)863 (42.8)901 (46.0)863 (43.7)859 (45.2)863 (42.7)
Tooth brushing (daily frequency)≤Once392 (18.9)388 (19.7)385 (19.0)283 (13.8)234 (11.6)218 (11.1)295 (14.9)176 (9.3)205 (10.2)
≥Twice1685 (81.1)1586 (80.3)1640 (81.0)1770 (86.2)1782 (88.4)1740 (88.9)1679 (85.1)1724 (90.7)1814 (89.8)
Use of dental flossNo1976 (95.1)1860 (94.2)1925 (95.1)1788 (87.1)1752 (86.9)1665 (85.0)1437 (72.8)1417 (74.6)1436 (71.1)
Yes101 (4.9)114 (5.8)100 (4.9)265 (12.9)264 (13.1)293 (15.0)537 (27.2)483 (25.4)583 (28.9)
Regular dental check-upsNo1777 (85.6)1562 (79.1)1741 (86.0)1706 (83.1)1478 (73.3)1408 (71.9)1427 (72.3)1343 (70.7)1346 (66.7)
Yes300 (14.4)412 (20.9)284 (14.0)347 (16.9)538 (26.7)550 (28.1)547 (27.7)557 (29.3)673 (33.3)
Self-rated oral health (SROH)Very good98 (4.7)99 (5.0)241 (11.9)236 (11.5)261 (12.9)257 (13.1)301 (15.2)262 (13.8)305 (15.1)
Good370 (17.8)364 (18.4)495 (24.4)508 (24.7)526 (26.1)558 (28.5)575 (29.1)515 (27.1)575 (28.5)
Fair1067 (51.4)1046 (53.0)910 (44.9)920 (44.8)898 (44.5)782 (39.9)810 (41.0)851 (44.8)841 (41.7)
Poor466 (22.4)404 (20.5)324 (16.0)338 (16.5)294 (14.6)308 (15.7)248 (12.6)242 (12.7)265 (13.1)
Very poor76 (3.7)61 (3.1)55 (2.7)51 (2.5)37 (1.8)53 (2.7)40 (2.0)30 (1.6)33 (1.6)
Bleeding on probing (BOP)No485 (23.4)349 (17.7)392 (19.4)389 (18.9)366 (18.2)224 (11.4)454 (23.0)530 (27.9)537 (26.6)
Yes1592 (76.6)1625 (82.3)1633 (80.6)1664 (81.1)1650 (81.8)1734 (88.6)1520 (77.0)1370 (72.1)1482 (73.4)
Probing pocket depth (PPD)≤3 mm1850 (89.1)1806 (91.5)1766 (87.2)1737 (84.6)1578 (78.3)1511 (77.2)1469 (74.4)1490 (78.4)1483 (73.5)
≥4 mm227 (10.9)168 (8.5)259 (12.8)316 (15.4)438 (21.7)447 (22.8)505 (25.6)410 (21.6)536 (26.5)
Decayed teeth score01739 (83.7)1801 (91.2)1781 (88.0)1882 (91.7)1810 (89.8)1812 (92.5)1776 (90.0)1747 (91.9)1854 (91.8)
≥1338 (16.3)173 (8.8)244 (12.0)171 (8.3)206 (10.2)146 (7.5)198 (10.0)153 (8.1)165 (8.2)
Filled teeth score0917 (44.2)930 (47.1)911 (45.0)959 (46.7)987 (49.0)951 (48.6)1006 (51.0)977 (51.4)1141 (56.5)
≥11160 (55.8)1044 (52.9)1114 (55.0)1094 (53.3)1029 (51.0)1007 (51.4)968 (49.0)923 (48.6)878 (43.5)
Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S) 0.67 30.670.500.330.330.500.330.330.33
(0.17, 1.00)(0.33, 1.17)(0.17, 1.00)(0.00, 0.67)(0.17, 0.67)(0.17, 0.83)(0.00, 0.83)(0.00, 0.67)(0.00, 0.67)
1 Number of people; 2 Number of people (Percentage); 3 Median (25th Percentile, 75th Percentile).
Table
Table 2. Differences in age, sex, oral health behaviors, and oral status by self-rated oral health group, Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Table 2. Differences in age, sex, oral health behaviors, and oral status by self-rated oral health group, Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Parameter Self-Rated Oral Healthp-Value 1
PoorGood
(n = 3325)(n = 14,671)
Age (y)182746 (82.6) 212,035 (82.0)0.452
SexMale1992 (59.9)8150 (55.6)<0.001
Tooth brushing (daily frequency)≥Twice2610 (78.5)12,810 (87.3)<0.001
Use of dental flossYes453 (13.6)2287 (15.6)0.004
Regular dental check-upsYes623 (18.7)3585 (24.4)<0.001
Bleeding on probing (BOP)No553 (16.6)3173 (21.6)<0.001
Probing pocket depth (PPD)≤3 mm2686 (80.8)12,004 (81.8)0.162
Decayed teeth score02639 (79.4)13,563 (92.4)<0.001
Filled teeth score01100 (33.1)7679 (52.3)<0.001
Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S)≤0.331378 (41.4)7774 (53.0)<0.001
1 Chi-squared test; 2 Number of people (percentage).
Table
Table 3. Logistic regression analysis when independent variables were selected based on the p-value (<0.20) by the chi-squared test, Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Table 3. Logistic regression analysis when independent variables were selected based on the p-value (<0.20) by the chi-squared test, Japanese university students, 2011–2019.
Parameter OR95%CIp-Value
SexFemale1
Male0.8780.810–0.9510.001
Tooth brushing (daily frequency)≤Once1
≥Twice1.731.57–1.92<0.001
Regular dental check-upsNo1
Yes1.221.11–1.35<0.001
Bleeding on probing (BOP)Yes1
No1.161.04–1.290.008
Decayed teeth score≥11
02.592.33–2.88<0.001
Filled teeth score≥11
02.081.92–2.26<0.001
Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S)>0.331
≤0.331.431.31–1.55<0.001
CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio. Independent variables: sex, tooth brushing (daily frequency), use of dental floss, regular dental check-ups, decayed teeth score, filled teeth score, OHI-S.
Table
Table 4. Factors associated with self-rated oral health (very good, good, and fair) on logistic regression analyses on a yearly basis from 2011 to 2019, Japanese university students.
Table 4. Factors associated with self-rated oral health (very good, good, and fair) on logistic regression analyses on a yearly basis from 2011 to 2019, Japanese university students.
Parameter Year
201120122013201420152016201720182019
SexFemale 11
Male 0.769
0.034		0.684
0.002
Tooth brushing (daily frequency)≤Once111111111
≥Twice1.60 1
<0.001 2		2.10
<0.001		1.63
<0.001		1.73
<0.001		2.41
<0.001		2.06
<0.001		0.625
0.024		1.72
0.007		1.84
0.001
Regular dental check-upsNo1 1
Yes1.44
0.023		 1.57
0.006
Bleeding on probing (BOP)Yes 1
No 1.44
0.041
Decayed teeth score≥1111111111
02.15
<0.001		2.34
<0.001		2.58
<0.001		2.94
<0.001		2.90
<0.001		2.68
<0.001		2.72
<0.001		3.18
<0.001		2.55
<0.001
Filled teeth score≥1111111111
01.88
<0.001		2.16
<0.001		1.56
<0.001		2.21
<0.001		1.90
<0.001		2.50
<0.001		2.11
<0.001		2.18
<0.001		2.19
<0.001
Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S)>0.33111111111
≤0.331.44
0.001		1.42
0.003		1.33
0.025		1.36
0.011		1.33
0.023		1.37
0.011		1.54
0.001		1.50
0.003		1.31
0.036
1 Odds ratio; 2 p-value. Independent variables: sex, tooth brushing (daily frequency), regular dental check-ups, decayed teeth score, filled teeth score, OHI-S. Independent variables not selected by the forward selection method are shown blank.
Table
Table 5. Factors associated with self-rated oral health (very good, good, and fair) on logistic regression analyses in 2011–2019, adding survey year and interactions with survey year, Japanese university students.
Table 5. Factors associated with self-rated oral health (very good, good, and fair) on logistic regression analyses in 2011–2019, adding survey year and interactions with survey year, Japanese university students.
Parameter OR95%CIp-Value
SexFemale1
Male0.8730.805–0.9460.001
Tooth brushing (daily frequency)≤Once1
≥Twice1.681.52–1.86<0.001
Bleeding on probing (BOP)Yes1
No1.161.04–1.290.008
Decayed teeth score≥11
02.572.31–2.86<0.001
Filled teeth score≥11
02.051.89–2.22<0.001
Oral Hygiene Index-Simplified (OHI-S)>0.331
≤0.331.381.27–1.50<0.001
Year 1.061.04–1.07<0.001
Year × Regular dental check-ups 1.031.01–1.050.002
CI, confidence interval; OR, odds ratio. Independent variables: sex, tooth brushing (daily frequency), regular dental check-ups, decayed teeth score, filled teeth score, OHI-S, survey year, interactions with survey year (year × sex, year × tooth brushing, year × regular dental check-ups, year × BOP, year × decayed teeth score, year × filled teeth score and year × OHI-S).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nakahara, M.; Toyama, N.; Ekuni, D.; Takeuchi, N.; Maruyama, T.; Yokoi, A.; Fukuhara, D.; Sawada, N.; Nakashima, Y.; Morita, M. Trends in Self-Rated Oral Health and Its Associations with Oral Health Status and Oral Health Behaviors in Japanese University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study from 2011 to 2019. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 13580. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192013580

AMA Style

Nakahara M, Toyama N, Ekuni D, Takeuchi N, Maruyama T, Yokoi A, Fukuhara D, Sawada N, Nakashima Y, Morita M. Trends in Self-Rated Oral Health and Its Associations with Oral Health Status and Oral Health Behaviors in Japanese University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study from 2011 to 2019. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(20):13580. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192013580

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nakahara, Momoko, Naoki Toyama, Daisuke Ekuni, Noriko Takeuchi, Takayuki Maruyama, Aya Yokoi, Daiki Fukuhara, Nanami Sawada, Yukiho Nakashima, and Manabu Morita. 2022. "Trends in Self-Rated Oral Health and Its Associations with Oral Health Status and Oral Health Behaviors in Japanese University Students: A Cross-Sectional Study from 2011 to 2019" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 20: 13580. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ijerph192013580

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop