Demmer, Ryan

ABSTRACT Cohort studies are vulnerable to confounding and time‐related biases. Recent advances emphasize the importance of emulating a hypothetical target trial to minimize several of these biases. The target trial framework is a critical tool for designing cohort studies. It requires explicit specification of protocol components: eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, outcomes, timing of follow‐up (time zero), and the causal contrast to be estimated. Critical to this framework is defining “time zero” when treatment assignment takes place and follow‐up begins, which prevents prevalent user and immortal time bias and ensures proper temporal sequencing of confounders, exposure, and outcome. By guiding design, data collection, and analysis, the target trial framework helps align observational studies with the principles of randomized trials, improving the validity and interpretability of their findings. While it cannot eliminate unmeasured confounding, this approach promotes transparent, bias‐conscious cohort design, minimizes time‐related bias, and supports more robust causal inference with observational data.

Background: Periodontitis is a potential modifiable factor influencing dementia risk. We examined whether improving periodontal health via regular flossing is associated with lower dementia risk. Methods: A total of 9,766 Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study participants with teeth were followed from visit 4 (1996-1998) through 2021. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate associations between regular dental flossing (≥1/week) and incident dementia. Covariates included age, race, gender, hypertension, diabetes, alcohol use, smoking status, obesity, physical activity, education level, income, insurance status, brushing frequency, regular dental care use and apolipoprotein E4 (APOE4) allele status . Cumulative incidence functions were estimated using death as a competing event. Results: Participants had mean age 62.6 years (SD = 5.6), 56% female, 79% white, 21% black, 63% reported regular flossing and 29.2% participants carry at least one APOE4 allele. The cumulative incidence of dementia was 52.6 % overall over 25 years. Regular flossing was independently and significantly associated with a lower hazard of developing dementia (HR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82–0.98, p = 0.02) after adjustment for all the covariates. In contrast, tooth brushing frequency (p=0.55) and regular dental care visit (p=0.22) were not significantly associated with dementia risk. By 25 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of dementia was 50% among flossers compared with 57% among non-flossers (Gray’s test p<0.0001, Figure). This translated to an Absolute Risk Reduction of 7%, Relative Risk Reduction of 12%, Number Needed to Floss 14. Conclusion: Flossing, but not tooth brushing or regular dental care, is independently associated with a reduced hazard of incident dementia. Dental flossing may be an additional strategy to reduce dementia risk. For every 14 individuals who floss ≥1/week, one fewer person will develop dementia.