Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Angle Orthod ; 89(5): 758-767, 2019 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30883187

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To quantify reliability of three-dimensional skeletal landmarks and a comprehensive set of dental landmarks in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and to determine the shapes of envelope of error. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three judges located 31 skeletal landmarks and 60 dental landmarks on the pre- and posttreatment CBCT images of 22 patients. Landmark error was determined by calculating the distance of deviation of landmark locations around their average. Standard deviation and mean radial spherical error were calculated. Scatterplots were constructed to characterize envelope of error. RESULTS: The midline landmarks of the cranial base were highly reliable. Bilateral skeletal landmarks tended to have larger error than midline landmarks. Among the nonconventional landmarks, fronto-zygomatic suture, condyle, and mental foramen showed relatively high reliability. However, foramen spinosum and temporal fossa showed larger errors. Gonion was the least reliable landmark. Most dental landmarks were located more reliably than skeletal landmarks. The highest reliability was found at incisal edges. Mesiobuccal cusp of first molars also showed high reliability. CONCLUSIONS: There were differences in the size and shape of the distributions of errors of different landmarks. Most landmarks showed elongated envelopes. Bilateral structures tended to show greater errors than midline structures. Most dental landmarks were more reliable than skeletal landmarks.


Assuntos
Pontos de Referência Anatômicos , Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico Espiral , Cefalometria , Tomografia Computadorizada de Feixe Cônico , Humanos , Imageamento Tridimensional , Boca/diagnóstico por imagem , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Dente/diagnóstico por imagem
3.
Angle Orthod ; 73(5): 556-64, 2003 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-14580024

RESUMO

This study tested the reliability and subtraction frequency of the study model-scoring system of the American Board of Orthodontists (ABO). We used a sample of 36 posttreatment study models that were selected randomly from six different orthodontic offices. Intrajudge and interjudge reliability was calculated using nonparametric statistics (Spearman rank coefficient, Wilcoxon, Kruskal-Wallis, and Mann-Whitney tests). We found differences ranging from 3 to 6 subtraction points (total score) for intrajudge scoring between two sessions. For overall total ABO score, the average correlation was .77. Intrajudge correlation was greatest for occlusal relationships and least for interproximal contacts. Interjudge correlation for ABO score averaged r = .85. Correlation was greatest for buccolingual inclination and least for overjet. The data show that some judges, on average, were much more lenient than others and that this resulted in a range of total scores between 19.7 and 27.5. Most of the deductions were found in the buccal segments and most were related to the second molars. We present these findings in the context of clinicians preparing for the ABO phase III examination and for orthodontists in their ongoing evaluation of clinical results.


Assuntos
Avaliação Educacional/estatística & dados numéricos , Modelos Dentários/estatística & dados numéricos , Ortodontia/estatística & dados numéricos , Conselhos de Especialidade Profissional/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Julgamento , Masculino , Má Oclusão/terapia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Variações Dependentes do Observador , Ortodontia/educação , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...