OBJECTIVE To establish a interview outline design process and quality control evaluation method based on grounded theory， providing ideas for qualitative research interview outline design in medical fields. METHODS A literature review was conducted to understand the current research status； a preliminary interview outline was developed around the research content. The triangulation method， group evaluation， expert review and pre-interview were adopted to execute the interview outline and conduct quality control. The evaluation indicators and target values were formulated （an average score for the overall quality evaluation of all indicators ≥4.5， and an average score for individual indicators ≥4.00） to evaluate the effect of the interview outline. Taking the research on the mechanism of physicians’ prescribing behavior under the background of Diagnosis Related Groups （DRGs） payment as an example， the methodological contents of above interview outline were applied in practical research. RESULTS The interview outline included basic information and interview questions. The interview questions were divided into three parts：influencing factors survey， promoting and hindering factors of standardizing physician prescription behavior， and communication， with a total of 12 questions. After being reviewed by members of the research group， experts review and pre- interview， a total of 9 people participated in the quality control evaluation of the interview outline. The overall evaluation score was 4.94 （＞4.50）， and the average score of each indicator was greater than 4.00， indicating that the quality of the outline met the requirements for the interview and could be used for the formal interview. CONCLUSIONS The established interview outline design and quality control method based on grounded theory provides ideas for the qualitative research interview outline design in the medical field， and lays the foundation for further using grounded theory to study the influencing factors and mechanisms of physician prescription behavior under the DRG background.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Risk assessment models for periodontal disease provide dentists with a precise and consolidated evalua-tion of the prognosis of periodontitis,enabling the formulation of personalized treatment plans.Periodontal risk assess-ment systems have been widely applied in clinical practice and research.The application fields of periodontal risk assessment systems vary based on the distinctions between clinical periodontal parameters and risk factors.The assess-ment models listed below are commonly used in clinical practice,including the periodontal risk calculator(PRC),which is an individual-based periodontal risk assessment tool that collects both periodontal and systemic information for pre-diction;the periodontal assessment tool(PAT),which allows for quantitative differentiation of stages of periodontal dis-ease;the periodontal risk assessment(PRA)and modified periodontal risk assessment(mPRA),which are easy to use;and the classification and regression trees(CART),which assess the periodontal prognosis based on a single affected tooth.Additionally,there are orthodontic-periodontal combined risk assessment systems and implant periapical risk as-sessment systems tailored for patients needing multidisciplinary treatment.This review focuses on the current applica-tion status of periodontal risk assessment systems.

Localized juvenile spongiotic gingival hyperplasia(LJSGH)is a kind of gingival hyperplasia with unique pathological manifestations.Its clinical manifestations are atypical,and the etiology and pathogenesis are unclear.No case report was reported in China.The diagnosis of this disease mainly relies on pathological testing,and recurrence may occur after treatment.The best treatment method still lacks medical evidence.This paper reports a case of LJSGH in a teenager and summarizes its clinical,pathological,and treatment through literature review.This work provides a refer-ence for the diagnosis and treatment of this disease.

Objective:To explore the expression of PICK1 in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and its clinical significance.Methods:A retrospective case series study was conducted. Cancer tissues and paracancerous tissues (1cm from the edge of cancer tissues) were collected from 30 HCC patients undergoing surgical resection in Shanxi Province Cancer Hospital from August 2020 to April 2023. The relative expression level of PICK1 mRNA in 30 fresh HCC samples was detected by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). The clinicopathological data from 132 HCC patients undergoing surgical resection in Shanxi Province Cancer Hospital from January 2015 to November 2018 were collected. Meanwhile, paraffin specimens were collected from cancer tissues and paracancerous tissues, and relative expression level of PICK1 protein was detected by using immunohistochemistry method. According to the PICK1 protein expression, 132 HCC patients were divided into the low expression group (immunohistochemistry scores < 3 points) and the high expression group (immunohistochemistry scores ≥ 3 points). Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the 2 groups, and log-rank test was also performed.Results:The result of qRT-PCR showed that the relative expression level of PICK1 mRNA in fresh cancer tissues of 30 HCC patients was lower than that in corresponding paracancerous tissues (0.43±0.38 vs. 1.10±0.12), and the difference was statistically significant ( t = -13.66, P < 0.001). Among 132 HCC patients, 86 (65.2%) cases had PICK1 protein low expression and 46 (34.8%) cases had PICK1 protein high expression; among the corresponding paracancerous tissues, 37 (28.0%) tissues had PICK1 protein low expression and 95 (72.0%) tissues had PICK1 protein low expression. The high expression rate of PICK1 protein in HCC tissues was lower than that in paracancerous tissues, and the difference was statistically significant ( χ2 = 35.07, P < 0.001). There were statistically significant differences in PICK1 protein expression level of HCC patients with different tumor diameter, tumor number, tumor type, TNM staging, encapsulation or not and vascular invasion (all P < 0.05). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that the median OS time was 54.9 months (95% CI: 41.0 months-not reached) and 17.8 months (95% CI: 13.1-25.0 months), respectively in the PICK1 high expression group and the PICK1 low expression group after surgery; and the OS in the PICK1 high expression group was better than that in the the PICK1 low expression group, and the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.001). The median DFS time was 43.0 months (95% CI: 31.0 months-not reached), 15.0 months (95% CI: 11.1 months-20.1months), respectively in the PICK1 high expression group and the PICK1 low expression group; and the DFS in the PICK1 high expression group was better than that in the PICK1 low expression group, and the difference was statistically significant ( P < 0.001). Conclusions:PICK1 is lowly expressed in HCC tissues, and HCC patients with PICK1 low expression have poor prognosis.