Assessment of reliability in orthodontic literature.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Richard E Donatelli, Ji-Ae Park, Yasser Murdi Abdullah Alghamdi, Nikolaos Pandis, Shin-Jae Lee
{"title":"Assessment of reliability in orthodontic literature.","authors":"Richard E Donatelli,&nbsp;Ji-Ae Park,&nbsp;Yasser Murdi Abdullah Alghamdi,&nbsp;Nikolaos Pandis,&nbsp;Shin-Jae Lee","doi":"10.2319/081021-625.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To map the statistical methods applied to assess reliability in orthodontic publications and to identify possible trends over time.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Original research articles published in 2009 and 2019 in a subset of orthodontic journals were downloaded. Publication characteristics, including publication year, number of authors, single vs multicenter study, geographic origin of the study, statistician involvement, study category, subject category, types of reliability assessment, and statistical methods applied to assess reliability, were recorded. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate associations between reliability analysis and study characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 768 original research articles were analyzed. The most prevalent study category was observational (69%) with a statistician involved in 16% of studies. Overall, reliability was assessed in 47% of studies, and the most frequent methods applied to assess reliability were intraclass correlation coefficients or kappa statistics (60.4%). The odds of applying appropriate methods were greater in 2019 than in 2009 (odds ratio [OR]: 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.75, 3.37; P < .001). Involvement of a statistician resulted in greater odds of applying appropriate methods compared to no statistician involvement (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.23, 2.87; P < .01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Over the past decade (2009 vs 2019), reliability assessment became more common in the orthodontic literature, and studies applying correct statistical methods to assess reliability significantly increased. This trend was more apparent in studies that involved a statistician, which may highlight the role of the statistician.</p>","PeriodicalId":50790,"journal":{"name":"Angle Orthodontist","volume":"92 3","pages":"409-414"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9020402/pdf/i1945-7103-92-3-409.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Angle Orthodontist","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2319/081021-625.1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To map the statistical methods applied to assess reliability in orthodontic publications and to identify possible trends over time.

Materials and methods: Original research articles published in 2009 and 2019 in a subset of orthodontic journals were downloaded. Publication characteristics, including publication year, number of authors, single vs multicenter study, geographic origin of the study, statistician involvement, study category, subject category, types of reliability assessment, and statistical methods applied to assess reliability, were recorded. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate associations between reliability analysis and study characteristics.

Results: A total of 768 original research articles were analyzed. The most prevalent study category was observational (69%) with a statistician involved in 16% of studies. Overall, reliability was assessed in 47% of studies, and the most frequent methods applied to assess reliability were intraclass correlation coefficients or kappa statistics (60.4%). The odds of applying appropriate methods were greater in 2019 than in 2009 (odds ratio [OR]: 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.75, 3.37; P < .001). Involvement of a statistician resulted in greater odds of applying appropriate methods compared to no statistician involvement (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.23, 2.87; P < .01).

Conclusions: Over the past decade (2009 vs 2019), reliability assessment became more common in the orthodontic literature, and studies applying correct statistical methods to assess reliability significantly increased. This trend was more apparent in studies that involved a statistician, which may highlight the role of the statistician.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

正畸文献可靠性评估。
目的:绘制用于评估正畸出版物可靠性的统计方法,并确定可能的趋势。材料和方法:下载2009年和2019年发表在正畸期刊子集上的原创研究文章。记录发表特征,包括发表年份、作者数量、单中心与多中心研究、研究的地理来源、统计学家参与、研究类别、主题类别、可靠性评估类型和可靠性评估的统计方法。采用描述性统计、卡方检验和逻辑回归分析来调查信度分析与研究特征之间的关系。结果:共分析了768篇原创研究论文。最普遍的研究类别是观察性研究(69%),统计学家参与了16%的研究。总体而言,47%的研究评估了可靠性,最常用的评估可靠性的方法是类内相关系数或kappa统计(60.4%)。2019年采用合适方法的几率大于2009年(比值比[OR]: 2.43;95%置信区间[CI]: 1.75, 3.37;P < 0.001)。与没有统计学家的参与相比,统计学家的参与导致应用适当方法的几率更大(OR: 1.88;95% ci: 1.23, 2.87;P < 0.01)。结论:在过去十年(2009年vs 2019年),可靠性评估在正畸文献中越来越普遍,应用正确统计方法评估可靠性的研究显著增加。这一趋势在涉及统计学家的研究中更为明显,这可能会突出统计学家的作用。
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
Angle Orthodontist
Angle Orthodontist 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
95
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Angle Orthodontist is the official publication of the Edward H. Angle Society of Orthodontists and is published bimonthly in January, March, May, July, September and November by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation Inc. The Angle Orthodontist is the only major journal in orthodontics with a non-commercial, non-profit publisher -- The E. H. Angle Education and Research Foundation. We value our freedom to operate exclusively in the best interests of our readers and authors. Our website www.angle.org is completely free and open to all visitors.
×
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