Aesthetic appraisal is rarely included in the objective assessment of outcome studies of impacted maxillary canines treatment. The present study aimed to validate a new index for assessing the aesthetic appearance of maxillary canines and adjacent soft tissues. The Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery at University Hospitals Leuven. Four oral‐maxillofacial surgeons, two orthodontists, two prosthodontists, and two lay persons rated 11 maxillary canines and adjacent soft tissues according to the new index. Each of the examiners repeated the examination three times with a 2‐week interval. Twelve relevant aesthetic variables were selected on the basis of the anatomic form, color, and surface characteristics of the canine crown and on the basis of the anatomic form, color, and surface characteristics of the adjacent soft tissues. Intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient and Fleiss' kappa statistics were performed to analyze the intrarater and interrater agreement. The index proofed to be a reliable assessment tool. Considering the cumulative assessment of the Maxillary Canine Aesthetic Index (MCAI), the mean ICC value for the interrater agreement of the 10 examiners was 0.71, representing a good agreement. Intrarater agreement ranged from 0.10 to 0.91. Interrater agreement (Fleiss' kappa statistics) calculated for each variable ranged from 0.08 to 0.98. The MCAI is a tool in rating aesthetic outcome of impacted canine treatment and adjacent soft tissues. The MCAI can be used to evaluate the aesthetic outcome after surgical exposure or transalveolar transplantation of maxillary canines.
Microalbuminuria is a risk factor for renal failure, stroke, and cardiovascular disease. However, estimating laboratory precision for albumin excretion is problematic because of its highly skewed distribution and the presence of values below assay detection limits. The authors used 781 quality control pairs from 24-hour urine samples collected between 1996 and 1999 in the International Study on Macronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) to compare percentage of technical error (%TE), the usual estimate of laboratory precision, with the mean and median values of within-pair coefficients of variation (CVs) for urinary albumin concentration and other urinary variables. In INTERMAP, %TE was larger than mean CV for all variables. Exclusion of potentially mislabeled samples reduced this difference; for example, for sodium, estimates of %TE and mean and median CV were 2.37%, 0.75%, and 0.28%, respectively, for all 781 pairs and 0.84%, 0.48%, and 0.27%, respectively, with possibly mislabeled pairs excluded. For urinary albumin concentration, exclusion of one mislabeled pair changed estimates for %TE and mean CV from 29.6% and 20.8% to 20.6% and 20.6%, while median CV was unchanged at 9.4%. After exclusion of urinary albumin concentration pairs with values below the detection limit, estimates were 15.4%, 11.4%, and 6.4%, respectively. Results indicate that mean and median CV are not equivalent to %TE and that values below the detection limit can markedly affect estimates and should be excluded.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.