Suppr超能文献

[三种斑块评估平面测量方法的比较研究]

[A comparative study of 3 planimetric methods of plaque evaluation].

作者信息

Vogels A L, Plasschaert A J, König K

出版信息

Dtsch Zahnarztl Z. 1975 Jun;30(6):412-5.

PMID:1056855
Abstract

Three plaque-scoring methods were compared by studying planimetrically on front teeth from coloured slides. Three criteria were investigated reprocucibility, discrinimating power and scoring time. Reproducibility was high and nearly the same for all methods. The discrinimating power of the tracing-method and the Optocom-method were higher than was found for the pilot-method. In conclusion the quick Pilot-method is useful in epidemiological studies whilst the other two time-consuming methods are preferable in clinical trials and follow-up studies.. The scoring time for the Optocom-method is half of that needed for the tracing method; this advantage speaks in favour of the semi-automatic Optocom-method in experimental/follow-up studies

摘要

通过对彩色幻灯片上前牙进行平面测量,比较了三种菌斑评分方法。研究了三个标准:可重复性、区分能力和评分时间。所有方法的可重复性都很高且几乎相同。描记法和Optocom法的区分能力高于初步法。总之,快速的初步法在流行病学研究中有用,而其他两种耗时的方法在临床试验和随访研究中更可取。Optocom法的评分时间是描记法的一半;这一优势表明半自动Optocom法在实验/随访研究中更具优势 。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验