首页> 外文期刊>Community dental health >Assessment of caries experience in epidemiological surveys: a review.
【24h】

Assessment of caries experience in epidemiological surveys: a review.

机译:评估流行病学调查中龋病的经验:综述。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

To review aspects of methods for assessing caries experience (CE) in epidemiological surveys.A search of English language literature published between January 2000 and December 2008 was undertaken using 'epidemiology', 'dental caries' and 'assessment' as search terms. Information on criteria for CE assessment, materials and settings, diagnostic threshold, training of examiners and validation of the screening results was extracted from the reports.Eighty-nine reports met the inclusion criteria. In 9 of the reports (10%) no reference was made to existing standardisation criteria for assessment of CE. Light condition applied (60 reports, 67%) and the use of a probe (60 reports, 67%) were frequently reported. Most reports mentioned that training and calibration of examiners took place, but the outcome of reliability checks were often not presented (48 reports, 54%). Only 28 of the reports (32%) specified that cleaning took place before the examination. Journals with Impact Factor (IF) provided specific information on methods more frequently than journals without. The WHO Basic Methods for Oral Health Surveys were most often applied (52 surveys, 58%). However, deviations from the original description were found especially for measurement and reporting of reliability measurement (24, 46% and 29, 56% respectively), type of probe used (27, 52%) and light condition (16, 31%). All of these hamper the (external) validity of the obtained results.There is a clear need for improvement of the reporting and application of methods for assessing CE in epidemiological surveys. A check-list of aspects of methods to be included in reports of surveys assessing CE is proposed by the authors.
机译:为了回顾评估流行病学调查中龋病经验(CE)方法的各个方面,以``流行病学'',``龋齿''和``评估''为搜索词,对2000年1月至2008年12月发表的英语文献进行了搜索。从报告中提取了有关CE评估标准,材料和设置,诊断阈值,检查员培训以及筛查结果验证的信息.89份报告符合纳入标准。在9份报告(占10%)中,没有提及现有的CE评估标准。经常报告有施加光照的情况(60例报告,占67%)和使用探头的情况(60例报告,占67%)。大多数报告提到对检查员进行了培训和校准,但是可靠性检查的结果通常没有提供(48个报告,54%)。只有28个报告(32%)指定在检查之前进行了清洁。具有影响因子(IF)的期刊比没有期刊的期刊更频繁地提供有关方法的特定信息。世卫组织口腔健康调查的基本方法最常使用(52项调查,占58%)。但是,发现与原始描述存在差异,特别是在测量和可靠性测量报告(分别为24%,46%和29%,56%),所用探头的类型(27%,52%)和光照条件(16%,31%)方面。所有这些都妨碍了所获得结果的(外部)有效性。显然需要改进流行病学调查中CE评估方法的报告和应用。作者提出了评估CE的调查报告中应包括的方法方面的清单。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号