DMFR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jowitt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Horner, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jowitt, N.
Right arrow Articles by Horner, K.

Dentomaxillofacial Radiology, Vol 28, Issue 3 141-144, Copyright © 1999 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

The reproducibility of the mandibular cortical index

N. Jowitt, T. MacFarlane, H. Devlin, E. Klemetti and K. Horner
Department of Dental Medicine and Surgery, Turner Dental School, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the reproducibility and diagnostic validity of Mandibular Cortical Index (MCI) when used by minimally trained observers. METHODS: Four 'experts' and 45 final-year dental students classified the appearance of the lower border of the mandibular cortex in 30 panoramic radiographs using the MCI. Experts viewed the original radiographs. The students received instruction in the MCI and viewed slides of the radiographs in a lecture theatre. RESULTS: For intra-observer agreement, the experts had significantly higher overall values of weighted kappa, indicating substantial agreement in MCI assessment, whereas the students showed moderate agreement. For inter-observer agreement, there was fair agreement between the experts and poor agreement between the students. Using the experts' MCI assessment as the 'gold standard', the mean sensitivity of the students in diagnosis of C3 was 0.71 (maximum 0.95, minimum 0.25) and mean specificity was 0.56 (maximum 0.9, minimum 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: The MCI has important limitations in terms of intra- and inter-observer agreement. Minimal training in its use, such as might be given in a lecture format to dentists, was ineffective and associated with poor inter-observer agreement and limited diagnostic validity in identifying signs of osteoporosis. More lengthy training and experience in using the MCI would be needed for it to be effective as a diagnostic tool in general dental practice.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
K Gungor, Z. Akarslan, M Akdevelioglu, H Erten, and M Semiz
The precision of the panoramic mandibular index
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., November 1, 2006; 35(6): 442 - 446.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
F Yasar and F Akgunlu
The differences in panoramic mandibular indices and fractal dimension between patients with and without spinal osteoporosis
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., January 1, 2006; 35(1): 1 - 9.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING ALL BIR JOURNALS
Copyright © 1999 by the British Institute of Radiology.