ArticleKorean journal of orthodontics2019
Reliability of cone-beam computed tomography for temporomandibular joint analysis.
Article in Korean journal of orthodontics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demographic and structural indicators of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis in asymptomatic adults: a cone-beam computed tomography-based multivariate analysis.Oral radiology · 2026Article
- Degenerative changes of the mandibular condyle and their relationship with joint space: A CBCT study.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2025Article
- Potential of ultra-high-resolution CT in detecting osseous changes of temporomandibular joint: experiences in temporomandibular disorders.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Comprehensive positional and morphological assessments of the temporomandibular joint in adolescents with skeletal Class III malocclusion: a retrospective CBCT study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Condylar morphology and position changes after miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expansion in skeletal Class III malocclusion adult patients with mandibular deviation and unilateral posterior crossbite.Progress in orthodontics · 2022Article
- Cone-Beam Computed Tomography in Orthodontics.Dentistry journal · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim was to assess the intraobserver and interobserver reliabilities of temporomandibular joint linear measurements and condylar shape classifications performed with cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).
methodsCBCT images of 30 patients were measured at two different time points by two orthodontists using the Dolphin 3D program (n = 60). Anterior, posterior, and superior joint space measurements and sagittal joint morphology classification in the sagittal view and medial and lateral joint space and mediolateral width measurements and coronal joint morphology classification in the coronal view were recorded. Intraclass-interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and kappa statistics were used to assess intraobserver and interobserver reliability for the measurements and morphology classifications, respectively.
resultsThe ICC values were good for measurements of the posterior joint space by observer I and for measurements of the posterior, medial, and lateral joint spaces by observer II, while the other intraobserver measurements were excellent. Only the mediolateral width measurements showed excellent interobserver ICC values, while the other measurements showed good interobserver ICC values. Intraobserver agreement for the sagittal morphology classifications was moderate (κ = 0.479) and almost perfect (κ = 0.858) for observers I and II, respectively, while the corresponding agreement for the coronal morphology classifications was substantial for both observers. The interobserver agreement values for sagittal and coronal morphology classifications were slight (κ = 0.181) and fair (κ = 0.265), respectively.
conclusionsLinear temporomandibular joint measurements were reproducible and reliable in both intraobserver and interobserver evaluations. However, interobserver agreement for assessments of condylar shape was low.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.