Premium
Discriminant validity of the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and comparability with World Health Organization criteria in a cross‐sectional study
Author(s) -
Mendes Fausto Medeiros,
Braga Mariana Minatel,
Oliveira Luciana Butini,
Antunes José Leopoldo Ferreira,
Ardenghi Thiago Machado,
Bönecker Marcelo
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
community dentistry and oral epidemiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.061
H-Index - 101
eISSN - 1600-0528
pISSN - 0301-5661
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00557.x
Subject(s) - medicine , socioeconomic status , poisson regression , comparability , cross sectional study , discriminant validity , dentistry , environmental health , population , psychometrics , clinical psychology , mathematics , pathology , combinatorics , internal consistency
Mendes FM, Braga MM, Oliveira LB, Antunes JLF, Ardenghi TM, Bönecker M. Discriminant validity of the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and comparability with World Health Organization criteria in a cross‐sectional study. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2010; 38: 398–407. © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S Abstract – Objectives: The aim of this cross‐sectional study in preschool children was to assess the ability of International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) in discriminating socioeconomic factors associated with the presence of caries lesions at both noncavitated and cavitated thresholds and to compare with the standard World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Methods: The study was carried out in Amparo, Brazil, during the National Day of Children’s Vaccination including 252 children aged 36–59 months. The same child was independently examined by two calibrated examiners, one using the ICDAS and the other using WHO criteria. Socioeconomic information was also recorded. Associations between socioeconomic factors and presence of caries assessed as binary (caries prevalence) and count outcome (actual dmfs values) obtained by WHO criteria and by ICDAS at noncavitated and cavitated thresholds were evaluated by Poisson regression analysis with robust variance. Results: Some covariates were significantly associated with the presence of caries evaluated by the WHO criteria and by ICDAS (using score 3 as cut‐off point). When noncavitated scores of ICDAS were used to calculate the presence of caries, the discriminant power decreased. When dmfs values were used as outcome, no differences in the associations were observed between two systems or using noncavitated caries lesions. Conclusion: Cavitated scores of ICDAS present similar discriminant validity compared with WHO criteria when presence of caries is used as outcome; however, when actual dmfs values are used, no differences are observed in using noncavitated or cavitated caries lesions.