Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Vieira, Sonia
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Corrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226560
Resumo: Statistical analysis of data is crucial in cephalometric investigations. There are certainly excellent examples of good statistical practice in the field, but some articles published worldwide have carried out inappropriate analyses. Objective: The purpose of this study was to show that when the double records of each patient are traced on the same occasion, a control chart for differences between readings needs to be drawn, and limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. Material and methods: Data from a well-known paper in Orthodontics were used for showing common statistical practices in cephalometric investigations and for proposing a new technique of analysis. Results: A scatter plot of the two radiograph readings and the two model readings with the respective regression lines are shown. Also, a control chart for the mean of the differences between radiograph readings was obtained and a coefficient of repeatability was calculated. Conclusions: A standard error assuming that mean differences are zero, which is referred to in Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics as the Dahlberg error, can be calculated only for estimating precision if accuracy is already proven. When double readings are collected, limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. A graph with differences of readings should be presented and outliers discussed.
id UNSP_f7c2d534018fe83eaceafe8e32307b8d
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/226560
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurementsErrorsMeasurementsOrthodonticsStatistical analysis of data is crucial in cephalometric investigations. There are certainly excellent examples of good statistical practice in the field, but some articles published worldwide have carried out inappropriate analyses. Objective: The purpose of this study was to show that when the double records of each patient are traced on the same occasion, a control chart for differences between readings needs to be drawn, and limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. Material and methods: Data from a well-known paper in Orthodontics were used for showing common statistical practices in cephalometric investigations and for proposing a new technique of analysis. Results: A scatter plot of the two radiograph readings and the two model readings with the respective regression lines are shown. Also, a control chart for the mean of the differences between radiograph readings was obtained and a coefficient of repeatability was calculated. Conclusions: A standard error assuming that mean differences are zero, which is referred to in Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics as the Dahlberg error, can be calculated only for estimating precision if accuracy is already proven. When double readings are collected, limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. A graph with differences of readings should be presented and outliers discussed.Sao Leopoldo Mandic Dental Research Center, Campinas, SPDepartment of Biostatistics Institute of Biosciences State University of Sao Paulo-UNESP, Botucatu-Distrito de Rubiao Jr, s/n-18618-900, Botucatu-Sao PauloDepartment of Biostatistics Institute of Biosciences State University of Sao Paulo-UNESP, Botucatu-Distrito de Rubiao Jr, s/n-18618-900, Botucatu-Sao PauloSao Leopoldo Mandic Dental Research CenterUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)Vieira, SoniaCorrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]2022-04-29T01:14:05Z2022-04-29T01:14:05Z2011-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article488-492http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009Journal of Applied Oral Science, v. 19, n. 5, p. 488-492, 2011.1678-77651678-7757http://hdl.handle.net/11449/22656010.1590/S1678-775720110005000092-s2.0-80053929165Scopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengJournal of Applied Oral Scienceinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-04-29T01:14:05Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/226560Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462022-04-29T01:14:05Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
title Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
spellingShingle Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
Vieira, Sonia
Errors
Measurements
Orthodontics
title_short Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
title_full Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
title_fullStr Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
title_full_unstemmed Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
title_sort Statistical methods for assessing agreement between double readings of clinical measurements
author Vieira, Sonia
author_facet Vieira, Sonia
Corrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 Corrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
author2_role author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Sao Leopoldo Mandic Dental Research Center
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Vieira, Sonia
Corrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Errors
Measurements
Orthodontics
topic Errors
Measurements
Orthodontics
description Statistical analysis of data is crucial in cephalometric investigations. There are certainly excellent examples of good statistical practice in the field, but some articles published worldwide have carried out inappropriate analyses. Objective: The purpose of this study was to show that when the double records of each patient are traced on the same occasion, a control chart for differences between readings needs to be drawn, and limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. Material and methods: Data from a well-known paper in Orthodontics were used for showing common statistical practices in cephalometric investigations and for proposing a new technique of analysis. Results: A scatter plot of the two radiograph readings and the two model readings with the respective regression lines are shown. Also, a control chart for the mean of the differences between radiograph readings was obtained and a coefficient of repeatability was calculated. Conclusions: A standard error assuming that mean differences are zero, which is referred to in Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics as the Dahlberg error, can be calculated only for estimating precision if accuracy is already proven. When double readings are collected, limits of agreement and coefficients of repeatability must be calculated. A graph with differences of readings should be presented and outliers discussed.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-01-01
2022-04-29T01:14:05Z
2022-04-29T01:14:05Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009
Journal of Applied Oral Science, v. 19, n. 5, p. 488-492, 2011.
1678-7765
1678-7757
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226560
10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009
2-s2.0-80053929165
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/226560
identifier_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science, v. 19, n. 5, p. 488-492, 2011.
1678-7765
1678-7757
10.1590/S1678-77572011000500009
2-s2.0-80053929165
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Oral Science
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 488-492
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799964719442821120