Reasoning behind discrepancies in periodontal diagnosis and classification: A mixed‐methods analysis
This study explored how dental students think through periodontal cases by analyzing their written responses to three OEQs on real-world case scenarios involving periodontal diagnosis, risk factor identification, and periodontitis staging. Among 138 respondents, 28% correctly diagnosed the gingivitis case; 38% identified smoking as the risk factor; 72% correctly assigned Stage III. Common errors included overreliance on probing depth, limited use or misinterpretation of bone loss on radiographs. For staging, respondents frequently overlooked the number of teeth lost due to periodontitis and overweighted isolated periodontal complexity features, leading to overrating. These findings indicate a need for structured, case-based training emphasizing integration of clinical and radiographic data to improve diagnostic accuracy.
Authors
- Seok‐Mo Heo (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2511-8123)
- Se‐Lim Oh (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2252-8546)
- Thomas W. Oates
Institutions
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- Jeonju National University of Education (KR)
- Jeonbuk State Institute (KR)
- Jeonbuk National University (KR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Periodontology
- Published
- 2026-02-19
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1002/jper.70083
- Primary Topic
- Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00