Diagnostic yield of ink-jet prints from digital radiographs for the assessment of approximal carious lesions: ROC-analysis

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 79, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 277-282

  Schulze, Ralf K W ^a   Grimm, Stefanie ^a   Schulze, Dirk ^b   Voss, Kai ^c   Keller, Hans Peter ^d   Wedel, Matthias ^e  

^a JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

^d NA Dental (NADENT) im DIN   (Germany)

^e SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Caries diagnostics; Dental radiography; Digital dental radiography; Hardcopy; ROC analysis

Indexed keywords

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CATHODE RAY TUBE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; GERMANY; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; MICROSCOPY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRINTING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REPRODUCIBILITY; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

COMPUTER PERIPHERALS; DENTAL CARIES; HUMANS; INK; PAPER; PRINTING; RADIOGRAPHY, DENTAL, DIGITAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE;

EID: 80052171060     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2010.01.015     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bundesregierung BRD. Verordnung zur Änderung der Röntgenverordnung und anderer atomrechtlicher Verordnungen. Röntgenverordnung, 2002.
2. L.L. Otis, and R.G. Sherman Assessing the accuracy of caries diagnosis via radiograph. Film versus print J Am Dent Assoc 136 2005 323 330 (Pubitemid 40521653)
3. F. Gijbels, G.C. Sanderink, H. Pauwels, and R. Jacobs Subjective image quality of digital panoramic radiographs displayed on monitor and printed on various hardcopy media Clin Oral Invest 8 2004 25 29
4. R. Schulze, D. Schulze, and K. Voss Quality of individually calibrated customary printers for assessment of typical dental diagnoses on glossy paper prints: a multicenter pilot study Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 106 2008 578 586
5. I.S. Benediktsdottir, and A. Wenzel Accuracy of digital panoramic images displayed on monitor, glossy paper, and film for assessment of mandibular third molars Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 98 2004 217 222 (Pubitemid 39078027)
6. I.A. Pretty Review Caries detection and diagnosis: Novel technologies J Dent 34 2006 727 739 (Pubitemid 44810858)
7. J.A. Hanley Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: the state of the art Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 29 1989 307 335 (Pubitemid 19236809)
8. R.A. Henderson Assessing test accuracy and its clinical consequences: a primer for receiver operating characteristic curve analysis Ann Clin Biochem 30 1993 521 539
9. R.K.W. Schulze, A. Richter, and B. d'Hoedt The effect of wavelet and discrete cosine transform compression of digital radiographs on the detection of subtle proximal caries. ROC analysis Caries Res 42 2008 334 339
10. A. Wenzel, and H. Hintze Comparison of microscopy and radiography as gold standards in radiographic caries diagnosis Dentomaxillofac Radiol 28 1999 182 185
11. A. Wenzel, and H. Hintze Editorial Review. The choice of gold standard for evaluating tests for caries diagnosis Dentomaxillofac Radiol 1999 2001 132 136
12. H. Hintze, and A. Wenzel Diagnostic outcome of methods frequently used for carious validation Caries Res 37 2003 115 124
13. Bundesregierung BRD. Richtlinie zur Durchführung der Qualitätssicherung bei Röntgeneinrichtungen zur Untersuchung oder Behandlung von Menschen -Qualitätssicherungs-Richtlinie (QS-RL).Gemeinsames Ministerialblatt, 2003.
14. J.A. Hanley, and B.J. McNeil A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases Radiology 148 1983 839 843 (Pubitemid 13033817)
15. J.A. Hanley, and K.O. Hajian-Tilaki Sampling variability of nonparametric estimates of the area under receiver operating characteristic curves: an update Acad Radiol 4 1997 49 58 (Pubitemid 127469844)
16. K.R. Lee, W.F. Anderson, and L.H. Wetzel Hardcopy recordings of analog and digital images Invest Radiol 23 1988 933 939 (Pubitemid 19008949)
17. N. Buls, W. Shabana, P. Verbeek, P. Pevenage, and J. de Mey Influence of display quality on radiologists' performance in the detection of lung nodules on radiographs Br J Radiol 80 2007 738 743 (Pubitemid 350033113)
18. M. Funke, S. Obenauer, K.P. Hermann, U. Fischer, and E. Grabbe Softcopy- versus Hardcopybefundung in der digitalen Mammographie Radiologe 42 2002 265 269 (Pubitemid 36069719)
19. W. Geelen, A. Wenzel, E. Gotfredsen, M. Kruger, and L.G. Hansson Reproducibility of cephalometric landmarks on conventional film, hardcopy, and monitor-displayed images obtained by the storage phosphor technique Eur J Orthod 20 1998 331 340 (Pubitemid 128492290)
20. M. Goldmann, A.H. Pearson, and N. Darzenta Endodontic success - Who's reading the radiograph? Oral Surg 33 1972 432 437
21. A. Pascoal, C.P. Lawinski, I. Honey, and P. Blake Evaluation of a software package for automated quality assessment of contrast detail images-comparison with subjective visual assessment Phys Med Biol 50 2005 5743 5757 (Pubitemid 41750453)
22. A. Wenzel Digital radiography and caries diagnosis Dentomaxillofac Radiol 27 1998 3 11
23. G.H. Guerrant, W.S. Moore, and D.F. Murchison Diagnostic utility of thermal printed panographs compared with corresponding computer monitor images Gen Dent 49 2001 190 196