Dental age was studied in a sample of 451 Dutch children (226 boys and 225 girls) according to the method of Demirjian. They were born between 1972 and 1993 and were between 3 and 17 years of age at the time a dental pantomogram (DPT) was obtained. All children were placed in the age group closest to their chronological age. All 451 DPTs were scored by one examiner. A subset of 52 DPTs was scored by a second examiner and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen's kappa were calculated. The ICC was 0.99 and Cohen's kappa 0.68. Boys and girls were analysed separately.A significant difference was found between chronological age and dental age. On average, the Dutch boys were 0.4 years and the girls 0.6 years ahead of the French-Canadian children analysed by Demirjian. Therefore, the French-Canadian standards were not considered suitable for Dutch children. New graphs for the Dutch population were constructed using a logistic curve with the equation Y = 100*{1/(1 + e(-alpha(x - x0)))} as a basis. The 90 per cent confidence interval was calculated. To determine whether the logistic curve was correct, a residual analysis was carried out and scatter plots of the differences were made. The explained variance was 93.9 per cent for the boys and 94.8 per cent for the girls. Both the residual analysis and the scatter plots indicated that the logistic curve was appropriate for use with Dutch children. In addition to the graphs, tables were produced which transfer the maturity scores calculated by the method of Demirjian into Dutch dental age.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective:To explore the effect of goal-setting on physical functioning, quality of life and duration of rehabilitation in geriatric rehabilitation compared to care as usual.Data sources:Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library were searched from initiation to October 2018.Methods:We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before–after studies and studies using historic controls of older patients (mean age ⩾55 years) receiving rehabilitation for acquired disabilities. Our primary outcome was physical functioning; secondary outcomes were quality of life and rehabilitation duration. Cochrane guidelines were used to assess the risk of bias of the studies and extract data. Only RCT data were pooled using standardized mean difference (SMD).Results:We included 14 studies consisting of a total of 1915 participants with a mean age ranging from 55 to 83 years. Ten out of the 14 studies had a randomized controlled design, 7 of which could be pooled for the primary outcome. The risk of bias was judged high in several domains in all included studies. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between goal-setting and care as usual for physical functioning (SMD −0.11 (−0.32 to 0.10)), quality of life (SMD 0.09 (−0.56 to 0.75)) and rehabilitation duration (MD 13.46 days (−2.46 to 29.38)).Conclusion:We found low-quality evidence that goal-setting does not result in better physical functioning compared to care as usual in geriatric rehabilitation. For quality of life and duration of rehabilitation, we could not exclude a clinically relevant effect.

No abstract