Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Orthodontics 1996 18(1):77-80; doi:10.1093/ejo/18.1.77
© 1996 by European Orthodontic Society
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ribarevski, R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Brien, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ribarevski, R.
Right arrow Articles by O'Brien, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Consistency of orthodontic extraction decisions

R. Ribarevski*, P. Vig*, K. Dryland Vig*, R. Weyant* and K. O'Brien**,

*School of Dental Medicine, Unviersity of Pittsburgh, USA
**Department of Dental Medicine and Surgery, Unviersity of Manchester UK

Address for correspondence Professor Kevin O'Brien, Department of Dental Medicine and Surgery Turner Dental School, Higher Cambridge Street, Manchester M15 6FH, UK

Ten orthodontists having completed specialist training, examined on two occasions 1 month apart, the complete pre-treatment records of 60 Class II division 1 patients representing the full range of dental malocclusion severity. At each session the orthodontist recorded whether their proposed treatment involved extractions. The level of agreement both betweeon and with in the orthodontists was evaluated with the Kappa statistic. Data analysis revealed that the level of agreement with in the examiners was good, however the between examiner agreement was poor. It appeared that the orthodontists were applying different criteria in terms of the extraction decision and this has implications for orthodontic patients.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
O. H. Malik, M. Abdi-Oskouei, and N. A. Mandall
An alternative to study model storage
Eur J Orthod, April 1, 2009; 31(2): 156 - 159.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
P. G. Nijkamp, L. L. M. H. Habets, I. H. A. Aartman, and A. Zentner
The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning
Eur J Orthod, December 1, 2008; 30(6): 630 - 635.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
M. Al-Abdallah, J. Sandler, and K. O'Brien
Is the Royal London Space Analysis reliable and does it influence orthodontic treatment decisions?
Eur J Orthod, October 1, 2008; 30(5): 503 - 507.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Orthod.Home page
P. E. Ellis and P. E. Benson
Does articulating study casts make a difference to treatment planning?
J. Orthod., March 1, 2003; 30(1): 45 - 49.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Orthod.Home page
N. A. Mandall
Are photographic records reliable for orthodontic screening?
J. Orthod., June 1, 2002; 29(2): 125 - 128.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.