ArticleJournal of dental hygiene : JDH2011
Inter-examiner reliability of salivary diagnostic tests in a practice-based research network.
Article in Journal of dental hygiene : JDH, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Salivary Characteristics and Other Risk Factors Associated with the Severity of Chemical and Mechanical Tooth Wear in At-Risk Groups: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Tooth wear and the role of salivary measures in general practice patients.Clinical oral investigations · 2015Article
- Correlates of root caries experience in middle-aged and older adults in the Northwest Practice-based REsearch Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry research network.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2013Observational
- Salivary characteristics and dental caries: evidence from general dental practices.Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatient salivary characteristics are being measured as part of the Northwest PRECEDENT (Practice-based REsearch Collaborative in Evidence-based DENTistry) study on caries risk assessment. Prior to the implementation of these salivary diagnostic tests in a practice-based cohort study, inter-examiner reliability was assessed for resting salivary pH, stimulated salivary flow rate, pH and buffering capacity.
methodsAn initial evaluation of inter-examiner reliability of the 4 salivary tests was conducted among 6 dental auxiliary examiners using a convenience sample of 40 dental students. An in complete block design was used to assign samples to examiners (3 examiners per sample and 20 samples per examiner). Inter-examiner reliability testing was conducted on a patient population representative of the practice-based network in 4 member practices. Two dental assistants per practice independently conducted the salivary tests on samples provided by a random selection of 20 to 25 patients. A separate analysis was performed for each study. For each test, an inter-examiner reliability index was computed.
resultsResults from two studies are reported. In the first, stimulated salivary flow rate demonstrated excellent inter-examiner reliability, and resting salivary pH showed high inter-examiner reliability, while buffering capacity and stimulated salivary pH had moderate and very low inter-examiner reliability, respectively. In the second, inter-examiner reliability was excellent for the stimulated salivary flow rate and the resting salivary pH. The inter-examiner reliability for the stimulated salivary pH was also high and the stimulated salivary buffering capacity test had moderate reliability.
conclusionThe small variance in stimulated salivary pH and buffering capacity in dental students may have artificially made the reliability appear low in the first attempt at inter-examiner reliability testing. In the second study, all 4 tests had an accept able performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21619742PMC3631606W1901259432What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.