Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 8518263

Systematic and random errors associated with Johnston's cephalometric analysis.

Abstract

This study examined intra- and interexaminer systematic and random errors associated with Johnston's cephalometric method of assessing skeletal and dental changes from pairs of radiographs. Data were obtained from the tracings of radiographs of 30 mixed dentition subjects, who had been treated to correct a Class II malocclusion. Measurements included molar and incisor crown movements relative to basal bone, apical base change, maxillary and mandibular displacement relative to the cranial base, and total molar and overjet reduction. In addition, the change in axial inclination of the incisors and molars was determined. A paired t-test for each pair of replicates for each measure was performed to examine inter- and intra-examiner bias. Estimates of the random error, the coefficient of reliability, and confidence limits (95 per cent level) of a single determination were undertaken. No systematic errors occurred between/within examiners for any linear or angular measure. Interexaminer random errors, based on the standard deviation of the mean difference between replicates, were greater than intra-examiner random errors for 12 out of 13 parameters. Measures assessing molar correction and overjet reduction had the least amount of random error variance within and across judges, while changes in mandibular position had the greatest. Because considerable random errors occurred, the Johnston analysis when used to assess skeletal changes, as well as individual molar and incisor movements, may have limited utility in clinical practice for the individual case.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S D Keeling, S R Cabassa, G J King. 1993. Systematic and random errors associated with Johnston's cephalometric analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.20.2.101

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Assessment of blinding in pharmacotherapy and noninvasive neuromodulation randomized controlled trials for neuropathic pain in adults.

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), study participants and research personnel are often blinded to minimize biases related to knowing treatment allocation. To determine if blinding was effective, participants may be asked which treatment they believe they received ("treatment guess"). This descriptive review characterized blinding assessment (BA) reporting in pharmacotherapy and neuromodulation neuropathic pain RCTs. Of 288 papers, 36 (12.5%) reported a BA. One paper reported the results of 2 studies, so in total 37 studies with a BA were assessed. Of these, 19 were crossover, 17 parallel, and 1 partial crossover in design. All 37 studies assessed participant blinding, and 10 also assessed investigator blinding. Approximately 27% included an "unsure" answer option for treatment guess, and 38% asked the reason for the guess. There were no clear patterns in BA reporting across time nor based on treatment type. Seventeen trials provided sufficient data to calculate Bang Blinding Index (BI) to determine blinding success. Participants remained blinded (BI = 0 &#xb1; 0.2) in 10/17 placebo and 10/17 treatment arms, 6 placebo and 5 treatment arms had a BI > 0.2 suggesting possible unblinding, whereas 1 placebo and 2 treatment arms had a BI < -0.2 suggesting misinformed guessing. Overall, we found that BAs are done in a minority of published neuropathic pain trials and with variable methodology. Given the importance of minimizing risk of bias because of treatment unblinding, future studies should consider including BAs, and further consensus building is necessary to determine if and how BAs should be conducted and interpreted in analgesic clinical trials.

Bias↗

A residuals-based transition model for longitudinal analysis with estimation in the presence of missing data.

We propose a transition model for analysing data from complex longitudinal studies. Because missing values are practically unavoidable in large longitudinal studies, we also present a two-stage imputation method for handling general patterns of missing values on both the outcome and the covariates by combining multiple imputation with stochastic regression imputation. Our model is a time-varying auto-regression on the past innovations (residuals), and it can be used in cases where general dynamics must be taken into account, and where the model selection is important. The entire estimation process was carried out using available procedures in statistical packages such as SAS and S-PLUS. To illustrate the viability of the proposed model and the two-stage imputation method, we analyse data collected in an epidemiological study that focused on various factors relating to childhood growth. Finally, we present a simulation study to investigate the behaviour of our two-stage imputation procedure.

Bias↗

HIV viral dynamic models with dropouts and missing covariates.

In recent years HIV viral dynamic models have received great attention in AIDS studies. Often, subjects in these studies may drop out for various reasons such as drug intolerance or drug resistance, and covariates may also contain missing data. Statistical analyses ignoring informative dropouts and missing covariates may lead to misleading results. We consider appropriate methods for HIV viral dynamic models with informative dropouts and missing covariates and evaluate these methods via simulations. A real data set is analysed, and the results show that the initial viral decay rate, which may reflect the efficacy of the anti-HIV treatment, may be over-estimated if dropout patients are ignored. We also find that the current or immediate previous viral load values may be most predictive for patients' dropout. These results may be important for HIV/AIDS studies.

Bias↗