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.
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 ITMD were based on reliable and clinically credible methods.
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet; Jeroen G Lijmer Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-01-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Samuel F Dworkin; Kimberly H Huggins; Leanne Wilson; Lloyd Mancl; Judith Turner; Donna Massoth; Linda LeResche; Edmond Truelove Journal: J Orofac Pain Date: 2002
Authors: Eric L Schiffman; Richard Ohrbach; Edmond L Truelove; Feng Tai; Gary C Anderson; Wei Pan; Yoly M Gonzalez; Mike T John; Earl Sommers; Thomas List; Ana M Velly; Wenjun Kang; John O Look Journal: J Orofac Pain Date: 2010
Authors: E L Schiffman; M Ahmad; L Hollender; K Kartha; R Ohrbach; E L Truelove; L Zhang; J S Hodges; E Sommers; G C Anderson; Y M Gonzalez; X Guo; J O Look Journal: J Dent Res Date: 2016-11-19 Impact factor: 6.116
Authors: Eric Schiffman; Richard Ohrbach; Edmond Truelove; John Look; Gary Anderson; Jean-Paul Goulet; Thomas List; Peter Svensson; Yoly Gonzalez; Frank Lobbezoo; Ambra Michelotti; Sharon L Brooks; Werner Ceusters; Mark Drangsholt; Dominik Ettlin; Charly Gaul; Louis J Goldberg; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Lars Hollender; Rigmor Jensen; Mike T John; Antoon De Laat; Reny de Leeuw; William Maixner; Marylee van der Meulen; Greg M Murray; Donald R Nixdorf; Sandro Palla; Arne Petersson; Paul Pionchon; Barry Smith; Corine M Visscher; Joanna Zakrzewska; Samuel F Dworkin Journal: J Oral Facial Pain Headache Date: 2014
Authors: Gregory J Wright; Matthew C Coombs; R Glenn Hepfer; Brooke J Damon; Thierry H Bacro; Michael K Lecholop; Elizabeth H Slate; Hai Yao Journal: J Biomech Date: 2016-10-06 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: C C Peck; J-P Goulet; F Lobbezoo; E L Schiffman; P Alstergren; G C Anderson; R de Leeuw; R Jensen; A Michelotti; R Ohrbach; A Petersson; T List Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 3.837