Abstract
The presence or absence of an area of periapical pathosis as exemplified by an area of rarefaction in 260 cases selected at random was determined by viewing a single radiograph of each case using three viewing techniques. Six examiners viewed the radiographs independently. They agreed with one another about 50% of the time. Holding the radiograph up to the view box was found to be more accurate than either projecting the image on a screen or viewing the radiograph through a magnifier viewer. By using the three techniques, individual examiners were able to agree with themselves an average of 68.8% of the time. The presence or absence of an area of periapical pathosis as exemplified by an area of rarefaction in 260 cases selected at random was determined by viewing a single radiograph of each case using three viewing techniques. Six examiners viewed the radiographs independently. They agreed with one another about 50% of the time. Holding the radiograph up to the view box was found to be more accurate than either projecting the image on a screen or viewing the radiograph through a magnifier viewer. By using the three techniques, individual examiners were able to agree with themselves an average of 68.8% of the time.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
