首页> 外文期刊>Community dental health >Caries diagnosis: Agreement between WHO and ICDAS II criteria in epidemiological surveys
【24h】

Caries diagnosis: Agreement between WHO and ICDAS II criteria in epidemiological surveys

机译:龋齿诊断:世卫组织和ICDAS II标准在流行病学调查中达成一致

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objective: The aim of this study was to ascertain the equivalence between WHO caries diagnosis criteria and the ICDAS II caries classification scale for comparisons in epidemiological studies. Materials and methods: Two intraoral examinations, one using the ICDAS II caries codes and the other the WHO caries assessment method, were performed in a random sample of 101 children (29 aged 5-6 years, 32 aged 12 and 40 aged 15). Both examinations were performed not more than one month apart by two calibrated examiners (one for ICDAS II criteria, Kappa=0.86, and the other for WHO criteria, Kappa=0.91). The DMFT/dft, DMFS/dfs and caries prevalence (DMFT or dfs>0) indices were obtained in accordance with WHO assessment criteria and by applying 5 cut-off points on the ICDAS II scale. The differences between means were analysed with the Wilcoxon test and those between proportions with the McNemar test. Agreement was determined by the intraclass correlation index and the Kappa statistic. Results: The least differences between the WHO and ICDAS II criteria were found at cut-off point 3 (ICDAS II codes 3 to 6). The greatest agreement was found at the same cut-off point. Conclusion: While the equivalence between both methods used in epidemiological studies does not appear to be clear, possible errors could be reduced by locating this equivalence at cut-off point 3 and not at cut-off point 4.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是确定WHO龋齿诊断标准与ICDAS II龋齿分类量表之间的等效性,以便在流行病学研究中进行比较。材料和方法:随机抽取101名儿童(29名5-6岁的儿童,32名12岁的儿童和40名15岁的儿童)进行两次口内检查,一项使用ICDAS II龋齿法,另一项使用WHO龋齿评估法。两次检查相隔不超过一个月,由两名经过校准的检查员进行(一个为ICDAS II标准,Kappa = 0.86,另一个为WHO标准,Kappa = 0.91)。 DMFT / dft,DMFS / dfs和龋齿患病率(DMFT或dfs> 0)指数是根据WHO评估标准并在ICDAS II量表上应用5个临界点得出的。使用Wilcoxon检验分析平均值之间的差异,使用McNemar检验分析比例之间的差异。一致性由组内相关指数和Kappa统计量确定。结果:在临界点3(ICDAS II代码3至6)发现WHO和ICDAS II标准之间的差异最小。在相同的临界点发现了最大的共识。结论:虽然流行病学研究中使用的两种方法之间的等效性似乎尚不清楚,但可以通过将等效性定位在截止点3而不是截止点4来减少可能的错误。

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