Skip to main content

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Int J Public Health
Volume 69 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/ijph.2024.1607669
This article is part of the Call for papers TRENDS IN ADOLESCENT HEALTH AND WELLBEING - 40 YEARS OF THE HBSC STUDY View all 5 articles

Methodological approaches to comparative trend analyses: the case of adolescent toothbrushing

Torbjørn Torsheim Torbjørn Torsheim 1Frank J. Elgar Frank J. Elgar 2Alina Cosma Alina Cosma 3,4Caroline Residori Caroline Residori 5Oddrun Samdal Oddrun Samdal 1Christina Schnohr Christina Schnohr 6,7*
  • 1 University of Bergen, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway
  • 2 McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • 3 Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, County Dublin, Ireland
  • 4 Palacký University, Olomouc, Olomouc, Olomouc, Czechia
  • 5 University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, Luxembourg
  • 6 University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • 7 University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objectives: Research questions about how and why health trends differ between populations require decisions about data analytic procedure. The objective was to document and compare the information returned from stratified, fixed effect and random effect approaches to data modelling for two descriptive research questions about comparative trends in toothbrushing. Methods: Data included five cycles of the Health behaviour in school-aged children 2006 to 2022, providing a sample from 980192 11- to 15- year olds in 35 countries. Using logistic regression models and generalized linear mixed models, toothbrushing daily was regressed on time, following the three approaches to analysis of trends. Results: The stratified approach suggested a positive nonlinear trend in toothbrushing from 2006 to 2022 in most countries but provided no statistical inference on the variation. The fixed effect and the random effect approach converged on a positive but flattening overall trend, with statistically significant region variation in trends. Conclusion: Only the fixed effect approach and the random effects approach provided clear answers to the research question. Additional methodological considerations for making an informed choice of analytical approach are discussed.

    Keywords: HBSC study, trend analysis, methodological research, comparative analyses, toothbrushing

    Received: 18 Jun 2024; Accepted: 18 Dec 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Torsheim, Elgar, Cosma, Residori, Samdal and Schnohr. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Christina Schnohr, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.