Dentists' Ability to Identify Tooth Resorption on Radiographic Images and Their Preferences for Terminology.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Sheema Pham, Paul V Abbott
{"title":"Dentists' Ability to Identify Tooth Resorption on Radiographic Images and Their Preferences for Terminology.","authors":"Sheema Pham, Paul V Abbott","doi":"10.1111/adj.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tooth resorption has no universal classification, which leads to confusion. The aims were to assess dentists' ability to radiographically identify resorption and to determine their terminology preferences for three types of resorption.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Dentists completed an electronic questionnaire. Part 1 concerned professional profiles plus self-rating of each participant's level of resorption knowledge. In Part 2, participants identified types of resorption from radiographs. In Part 3, participants chose their preferred terminology and provided reasons for their choices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 444 complete responses, 55.6% of participants self-rated their knowledge as 'Acceptable'. The average number of correct responses when identifying resorption was 52.9% (6.3 out of 12; range: 0-12). Significant differences existed for gender, practice area, graduation year and education level. Preferred terms were external inflammatory resorption (72.3%) and external replacement resorption (63.3%) but no clear preference existed for external invasive resorption (31.8%) or external cervical invasive resorption (35.6%). Most common reasons for selecting terms were 'more descriptive', and a 'more accurate representation of what occurs in the tissues'.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>On average, dentists correctly identified 52.9% of the resorptive defects. There is a need for a standardised classification of the different types of tooth resorption.</p>","PeriodicalId":8593,"journal":{"name":"Australian dental journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian dental journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/adj.70003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Tooth resorption has no universal classification, which leads to confusion. The aims were to assess dentists' ability to radiographically identify resorption and to determine their terminology preferences for three types of resorption.

Materials and methods: Dentists completed an electronic questionnaire. Part 1 concerned professional profiles plus self-rating of each participant's level of resorption knowledge. In Part 2, participants identified types of resorption from radiographs. In Part 3, participants chose their preferred terminology and provided reasons for their choices.

Results: Of 444 complete responses, 55.6% of participants self-rated their knowledge as 'Acceptable'. The average number of correct responses when identifying resorption was 52.9% (6.3 out of 12; range: 0-12). Significant differences existed for gender, practice area, graduation year and education level. Preferred terms were external inflammatory resorption (72.3%) and external replacement resorption (63.3%) but no clear preference existed for external invasive resorption (31.8%) or external cervical invasive resorption (35.6%). Most common reasons for selecting terms were 'more descriptive', and a 'more accurate representation of what occurs in the tissues'.

Conclusion: On average, dentists correctly identified 52.9% of the resorptive defects. There is a need for a standardised classification of the different types of tooth resorption.

牙医在放射图像上识别牙齿吸收的能力及其对术语的偏好。
背景:牙齿吸收没有统一的分类,导致混淆。目的是评估牙医放射学识别吸收的能力,并确定他们对三种吸收类型的术语偏好。材料与方法:填写一份电子问卷。第一部分涉及专业概况和每个参与者吸收知识水平的自评。在第2部分,参与者从x光片中识别吸收类型。在第3部分中,参与者选择了他们喜欢的术语并提供了他们选择的原因。结果:在444份完整的回答中,55.6%的参与者自我评价他们的知识为“可接受”。识别吸收的平均正确率为52.9%(12分中的6.3分,范围:0-12)。性别、实习领域、毕业年份、学历差异显著。首选术语为外部炎症吸收(72.3%)和外部替代吸收(63.3%),但对外部侵入性吸收(31.8%)和外部宫颈侵入性吸收(35.6%)没有明确的偏好。选择术语最常见的原因是“更具描述性”,以及“更准确地表示组织中发生的事情”。结论:牙医师平均正确率为52.9%。有必要对不同类型的牙齿吸收进行标准化分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian dental journal
Australian dental journal 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
50
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian Dental Journal provides a forum for the exchange of information about new and significant research in dentistry, promoting the discipline of dentistry in Australia and throughout the world. It comprises peer-reviewed research articles as its core material, supplemented by reviews, theoretical articles, special features and commentaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信