Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. I: overview and methodology for assessment of validity
Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Department of Oral Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Department of Oral Diagnostic Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, United States.
Department of Diagnostic and Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, United States.
Show others and affiliations
2010 (English)In: Journal of Orofacial Pain, ISSN 1064-6655, E-ISSN 1945-3396, Vol. 24, no 1, p. 7-24Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

AIMS: The purpose of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Validation Project was to assess the diagnostic validity of this examination protocol. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the project's methodology, descriptive statistics, and data for the study participant sample. This article also details the development of reliable methods to establish the reference standards for assessing criterion validity of the Axis I RDC/TMD diagnoses. METHODS: The Axis I reference standards were based on the consensus of two criterion examiners independently performing a comprehensive history, clinical examination, and evaluation of imaging. Intersite reliability was assessed annually for criterion examiners and radiologists. Criterion examination reliability was also assessed within study sites. RESULTS: Study participant demographics were comparable to those of participants in previous studies using the RDC/TMD. Diagnostic agreement of the criterion examiners with each other and with the consensus-based reference standards was excellent with all kappas > or = 0.81, except for osteoarthrosis (moderate agreement, k = 0.53). Intrasite criterion examiner agreement with reference standards was excellent (k > or = 0.95). Intersite reliability of the radiologists for detecting computed tomography-disclosed osteoarthrosis and magnetic resonance imaging-disclosed disc displacement was good to excellent (k = 0.71 and 0.84, respectively). CONCLUSION: The Validation Project study population was appropriate for assessing the reliability and validity of the RDC/TMD Axis I and II. The reference standards used to assess the validity of Axis I TMD were based on reliable and clinically credible methods.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Quintessence , 2010. Vol. 24, no 1, p. 7-24
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-15853ISI: 000275119500002PubMedID: 20213028Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-77949881095Local ID: 11353OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-15853DiVA, id: diva2:1419375
Available from: 2020-03-30 Created: 2020-03-30 Last updated: 2024-06-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

PubMedScopus

Authority records

List, Thomas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
List, Thomas
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
Journal of Orofacial Pain
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 63 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf