Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 8, 2026

Systematic Assessment of Mammalian Skull Specimens for Dental and Temporomandibular Joint Pathology
Published on: August 22, 2022
The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. III: validity of Axis I diagnoses
Edmond Truelove1, Wei Pan, John O Look
1Department of Oral Medicine, Univeristy of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA. edmondt@u.washington.edu
Aims:
To estimate the criterion validity of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I TMD diagnoses.
Methods:
A combined total of 614 TMD community and clinic cases and 91 controls were examined at three study sites. RDC/TMD Axis I diagnoses were algorithmically derived from an examination performed by calibrated dental hygienists. Reference standards ("gold standards") were established by means of consensus diagnoses rendered by two TMD experts using all available clinical data, including imaging findings. Validity of the RDC/TMD Axis I TMD diagnoses was estimated relative to the reference-standard diagnoses (gold standard diagnoses). Target sensitivity and specificity were set a priori at greater than or equal to 0.70 and greater than or equal to 0.95, respectively.
Results:
Target sensitivity and specificity were not observed for any of the eight RDC/TMD diagnoses. The highest validity was achieved for Group Ia myofascial pain (sensitivity 0.65, specificity 0.92) and Group Ib myofascial pain with limited opening (sensitivity 0.79, specificity 0.92). Target sensitivity and specificity were observed only when both Group I diagnoses were combined (0.87 and 0.98, respectively). For Group II (disc displacements) and Group III (arthralgia, arthritis, arthrosis) diagnoses, all estimates for sensitivity were below target (0.03 to 0.53), and specificity ranged from below to on target (0.86 to 0.99).
Conclusion:
The RDC/TMD Axis I TMD diagnoses did not reach the targets set at sensitivity of > or = 0.70 and specificity of > or = 0.95. Target validity was obtained only for myofascial pain without differentiation between normal and limited opening. Revision of the current Axis I TMD diagnostic algorithms is warranted to improve their validity.
Related Concept Videos
Hypertension III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - I
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.

