Cited by 39Dental Health and Care UtilizationReliability and Agreement in MeasurementOral microbiology and periodontitis research

Examination criteria and calibration procedures for prevention trials of the E arly C hildhood C aries C ollaborating C enters

Open access
Warren, John J., Weber‐Gasparoni, Karin, Tinanoff, Norman, Batliner, Terence S., Jue, Bonnie, Santo, William, Garcia, Raul I., Gansky, Stuart A. +1 more·2015·Journal of Public Health Dentistry

Abstract

Objectives: To summarize diagnostic criteria and examiner training and calibration of the N ational I nstitute of D ental and C raniofacial R esearch‐funded E arly C hildhood C aries C ollaborating C enters (EC 4) and report examiner calibration results from 2010 to 2014. The EC 4 at B oston U niversity, U niversity of C olorado, and U niversity of C alifornia S an F rancisco are performing randomized controlled early childhood caries (ECC) prevention trials with caries as the main outcome measure. Methods: The EC 4 with U niversity of I owa consultants developed standardized tooth and tooth surface status examination criteria for use in field conditions, examiner training materials, and examiner calibration and re‐calibration methodologies. Calibration and re‐calibration were performed with 1‐ to 5‐year‐old children in the S an F rancisco M ission D istrict in which assessments from each examiner to be calibrated were compared with those from a single gold standard examiner from 2010 to 2014. Cohen's kappa statistic was used to determine inter‐examiner agreement. Results: A total of seven examiners were successfully (re)calibrated during that period, examining a total of 231 children. Overall unweighted C ohen's kappas for 10 surface conditions exceeded the criterion of 0.70. However, separate agreement for assessment of noncavitated lesions, as in other studies, was lower. Conclusions: An experienced multidisciplinary and multi‐institutional team was able to develop criteria and training materials to anticipate situations and field conditions the main trials would encounter. Examiners were successfully trained and (re)calibrated.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jphd.12102

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Using ICDAS helps researchers observe subtle intervention effects and nuanced changes from interventions.

    “Secondly, the adoption of ICDAS facilitates the observation of subtle intervention effects, allowing researchers to discern nuanced changes resulting from the interventions.6,7”

    From Training Protocol and Calibration of the International Caries Detection and Assessment System in a School-Based Clinical Trial of Elementary School-Age Children (2025) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Introduction describes ICDAS as a seven-category scale of caries severity, and the Discussion says it can provide a more detailed assessment than the criteria used in these trials. Those passages support its ability to distinguish finer clinical differences, but the paper does not show that ICDAS detects subtle intervention effects or changes resulting from interventions. The indexed passages provide section labels but no page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [4]Radike AW Criteria for diagnosis of dental caries Proceedings of the conference on the clinical testing of cariostatic agents 1972 Chicago American Dental Association 87 88

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Warren, J. J., Weber‐Gasparoni, K., Tinanoff, N., Batliner, T. S., Jue, B., Santo, W., Garcia, R. I., Gansky, S. A., & Centers, E. C. C. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Iowa (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • University of Colorado Anschutz (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine Boston University Boston MA USA
Corresponding author
Gansky, Stuart A.
Venue
Journal of Public Health Dentistry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-05-22
Volume
75
Issue
4
Pages
317-326
ISSN
  • 0022-4006 (ISSN-L)
  • 1752-7325
OpenAlex
W1896046750
Cited by
39
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1
FWCI
4.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Public Health Dentistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (U54DE019285, U54DE019275, U54DE019259, R21DE08650, U54DE014251)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Dental Health and Care Utilization
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Reliability and Agreement in Measurement
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
Keywords
early childhood caries, examiner calibration, inter-examiner agreement, examiner training
MeSH terms
Calibration, Child, Dental Caries, Humans, United States

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review