Role of lateral cephalograms in assessing severity and difficulty of orthodontic cases

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 120, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 254-262

  Pae, Eung Kwon ^a,b   McKenna, Gregory A ^c   Sheehan, T Joseph ^c   Garcia, Ramon ^c   Kuhlberg, Andrew ^a   Nanda, Ravindra ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH CENTER   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DENTAL CARE; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORTHODONTICS; PATIENT CARE; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICAL MODEL; TIME;

ADOLESCENT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; DENTAL MODELS; EPISODE OF CARE; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MODELS, STATISTICAL; OBSERVER VARIATION; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0035458950     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.116825     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Draker HL. Handicapping labio-lingual deviations: a proposed index for public purposes. Am J Orthod 1960;46:295-305.
2. Salzmann JA. Handicapping malocclusion assessment to establish treatment priority. Am J Orthod 1968;54:749-65.
3. Richmond S, Shaw WC, O'Brien KD, Buchanan IB, Jones R, Stephens CD. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 1992;14: 125-39.
4. Summers CJ. The occlusal index: a system for identifying scoring occlusal disorders. Am J Orthod 1971;59:552-67.
5. Consensus report and conference recommendations. Proceedings of the Orthodontic Indices Consensus Conference, St. Louis (MO); 1993. Vol. 1. American Association of Orthodontists.
6. DeGuzman L, Bahiraei D, Vig KW, Vig PS, Weyant RJ, O'Brien K. The validation of the Peer Assessment Rating index for malocclusion severity and treatment difficulty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107:172-6.
7. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA; 1982. p. 2.
8. Thomee R, Grimby G, Wright BD, Linacre JM. Rasch analysis of Visual Analog Scale measurements before and after treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome in women. Scand J Rehabil Med 1995;27:145-51.
9. Burden DJ, Stratford N. Training dental nurses in the use of the PAR index: a pilot study. Br J Orthod 1996;23:153-5.
10. McGorray S, Wheeler T, Keeling S, Yurkiewicz L, Taylor M, King G. Evaluation of orthodontists' perception of treatment need and the peer assessment rating (PAR) index. Angle Orthod 1999; 69:325-33.
11. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1989;70:857-60.
12. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. p. 62-108.
13. Guttman L. The base for scalogram analysis. In Stouger, editor. Measurement and prediction. Vol. 4. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press, 1950. p. 60-90.
14. Burstone B, Randal J, Legan H. Cephalometrics for orthognatic surgery. J Oral Surgery 1980;36:269-76.
15. Koyata H. A study comparing forty successfully treated North American black patients who selected cephalometric norms of the Ricketts' analysis [thesis]. Howard University, 1979.
16. Linacre JM. Facets. Chicago: MESA Press; 1999.
17. Han UK, Vig K, Weintraub J. Cosistancy of orthodontic decisions relative to diagnostic records. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1991;100:121-9.