Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 7, 2026
An Automated T-maze Based Apparatus and Protocol for Analyzing Delay- and Effort-based Decision Making in Free Moving Rodents
Published on: August 2, 2018
Decision-making of general practitioners on interventions at restorations based on bitewing radiographs
Cácia Signori1, Mark Laske2, Fausto M Mendes3
1Federal University of Pelotas, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Gonçalves Chaves, 457, 5th floor, Pelotas, RS, 96015560, Brazil; Radboud University Medical Centre, College of Dental Sciences, Preventive and Restorative Dentistry, Ph van Leydenlaan 25, PO Box 9101, 6500HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Objective:
The aim of this study was to compare decision-making based on bitewing analysis of restored proximal surfaces by general dental practitioners (GDPs) with diagnossis and clinical decisions made by experts in cariology and restorative dentistry.
Methods:
This practice-based study used a database of 7 general dental practices. Posterior bitewing radiographs were selected from the electronic patient files of patients, and 770 cases of proximal restored surfaces were selected. Fifty percent of the cases which lead to the restorative decision, and the other half were cases decided for monitoring by the GDPs. Three experts performed radiographic assessment. The outcome variables were agreement of diagnosis and decision of treatment. Cohen's kappa statistic was used.
Results:
For the experts, moderate to substantial intraexaminer agreement was observed for the diagnostic criteria, and kappa values of 0.77, 0.79, and 0.88 were obtained for each expert regarding the treatment assignment. Agreement between GDPs and the majority of experts for secondary caries varied between 67 and 83%. One hundred seventy-three out of 385 cases that were treated by GDPs were decided for monitoring by the experts, while 8 cases that were decided for monitoring by the GDPs were decided for treatment. The agreement between experts and GDPs was moderate for secondary caries detection, and fair for treatment decision.
Conclusion:
The GDPs tend to have a less conservative approach regarding the decision to intervene or not concerning the reassessment of restorations, showing moderate agreement with the experts for secondary caries detection and fair agreement regarding the treatment decision.
Clinical Significance:
This study highlights that GDPs tend to have a less conservative approach to the decision to intervene or not in posterior restorations, compared to experts in cariology and restorative dentistry. Efforts should be made to reduce these differences based on minimally invasive dentistry.
More Related Videos
05:48The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
Published on: June 12, 2020
05:35Author Spotlight: Developing a Point-of-Care Hemoglobin Estimation Method for Anemia Management
Published on: January 19, 2024
Related Concept Videos
01:30Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
01:19Restorative Care
01:03Nursing Interventions I: Taxonomy of Nursing Interventions
A nursing intervention is a treatment or action based on scientific concepts and knowledge from the nursing, behavioral, and physical sciences. Identifying and prioritizing nursing interventions based on the desired outcome...
01:29Nursing Interventions II: Selecting and Classifying the Nursing Interventions
01:20Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
01:09Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...