Journal of Clinical Medicine (Apr 2021)

Validity and Reproducibility of the Peer Assessment Rating Index Scored on Digital Models Using a Software Compared with Traditional Manual Scoring

  • Arwa Gera,
  • Shadi Gera,
  • Michel Dalstra,
  • Paolo M. Cattaneo,
  • Marie A. Cornelis

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10081646
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 10, no. 8
p. 1646

Abstract

Read online

The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reproducibility of digital scoring of the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and its components using a software, compared with conventional manual scoring on printed model equivalents. The PAR index was scored on 15 cases at pre- and post-treatment stages by two operators using two methods: first, digitally, on direct digital models using Ortho Analyzer software; and second, manually, on printed model equivalents using a digital caliper. All measurements were repeated at a one-week interval. Paired sample t-tests were used to compare PAR scores and its components between both methods and raters. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to compute intra- and inter-rater reproducibility. The error of the method was calculated. The agreement between both methods was analyzed using Bland-Altman plots. There were no significant differences in the mean PAR scores between both methods and both raters. ICC for intra- and inter-rater reproducibility was excellent (≥0.95). All error-of-the-method values were smaller than the associated minimum standard deviation. Bland-Altman plots confirmed the validity of the measurements. PAR scoring on digital models showed excellent validity and reproducibility compared with manual scoring on printed model equivalents by means of a digital caliper.

Keywords