← Back to Home
Learning Module

Regression Analysis

Predict outcomes and find relationships in dental data. Click any card below to explore each concept interactively.

Linear Logistic Multiple Assumptions
📈

Predict outcomes
Estimate pocket depth from age, smoking status, and plaque levels.

🦷

Dental research
Identify which risk factors truly influence implant failure or caries.

📋

Report results
Present coefficients, odds ratios, and confidence intervals in papers.

Core Regression Concepts

Click a card to learn and try it.

📉
Linear Regression
Continuous outcomes
Tap to try →
🔀
Multiple Regression
Many predictors
Tap to try →
🎲
Logistic Regression
Binary outcomes
Tap to try →
⚖️
Odds Ratio
Effect size for logistic
Tap to try →
Assumptions
Validity checks
Tap to try →
🎯
Model Fit (R²)
How good is the model?
Tap to try →
Interactive Regression Playground

Click the chart to add data points, then fit a regression line. Try preset dental datasets.

Logistic Regression Live Demo

Adjust the slider to see how smoking affects implant failure probability.

Scenario: Predicting Implant Failure from Cigarettes/Day
0 40
10 cigarettes/day
24%
S-Curve (Sigmoid Function)
Dental Research Simulation

Watch a regression study unfold step-by-step: recruit patients, collect data, fit the model, interpret results.

How to Report in a Paper
📐

Linear Regression
Report: B (95% CI), p-value
e.g. B=0.04 (0.02-0.06), p=0.001

🎲

Logistic Regression
Report: OR (95% CI), p-value
e.g. OR=2.5 (1.3-4.8), p=0.006

📋

Model Summary
Report: R², Adjusted R², F-stat
e.g. R²=0.42, F(3,96)=23.1, p<0.001

Model TypeCoefficient95% CIp-valueInterpretation
Linear
Age → CAL
B = 0.040.02 – 0.060.001Each year of age increases CAL by 0.04 mm
Multiple
Age + Smoking → PD
Bage=0.03
Bsmoke=1.2
0.01–0.05
0.6–1.8
0.004
<0.001
Adjusted for confounders
Logistic
Smoking → Implant Failure
OR = 2.51.3 – 4.80.006Smokers have 2.5x odds of implant failure
Example Reporting Text

"Multiple linear regression was performed to examine the effect of age, smoking status, and plaque index on clinical attachment loss. The model was statistically significant, F(3, 96) = 23.1, p < 0.001, R² = 0.42. Age (B = 0.04, 95% CI: 0.02–0.06, p = 0.001) and smoking (B = 1.2, 95% CI: 0.6–1.8, p < 0.001) were significant predictors, while plaque index was not (B = 0.15, 95% CI: -0.1–0.4, p = 0.22)."

Quick Reference Summary

📉 Linear Regression

Continuous outcome. Y = B0 + B1*X. Report B with 95% CI and p-value. Check linearity, normality of residuals.

🔀 Multiple Regression

Multiple predictors. Adjusts for confounders. Check multicollinearity (VIF < 10). Report adjusted R².

🎲 Logistic Regression

Binary outcome (yes/no). Reports odds ratios. Use when predicting implant failure, disease presence.

⚖️ Odds Ratio

OR = 1 (no effect), OR > 1 (increased risk), OR < 1 (protective). Always report with 95% CI.

✅ Key Assumptions

Independence, linearity, no multicollinearity, adequate sample size. EPV >= 10 for logistic regression.

🎯 Model Fit

R² = proportion of variance explained. Higher is better. Adjusted R² penalizes adding useless predictors.

DentalStats — educational content  ·  Back to Home