Comparison among gold standard techniques used for the validation of methods for occlusal caries detection

The aim of this in vitro study was to assess the agreement among four techniques used as gold standard for the validation of methods for occlusal caries detection. Sixty-five human permanent molars were selected and one site in each occlusal surface was chosen as the test site. The teeth were cut and prepared according to each technique: stereomicroscopy without coloring (1), dye enhancement with rhodamine B (2) and fuchsine/acetic light green (3), and semi-quantitative microradiography (4). Digital photographs from each prepared tooth were assessed by three examiners for caries extension. Weighted kappa, as well as Friedman's test with multiple comparisons, was performed to compare all techniques and verify statistical significant differences. Results: kappa values varied from 0.62 to 0.78, the latter being found by both dye enhancement methods. Friedman's test showed statistical significant difference (P < 0.001) and multiple comparison identified these differences among all techniques, except between both dye enhancement methods (rhodamine B and fuchsine/acetic light green). Cross-tabulation showed that the stereomicroscopy overscored the lesions. Both dye enhancement methods showed a good agreement, while stereomicroscopy overscored the lesions. Furthermore, the outcome of caries diagnostic tests may be influenced by the validation method applied. Dye enhancement methods seem to be reliable as gold standard methods.

Comparison of three strip-type tests and two laboratory methods for salivary buffering analysis

This study evaluated the correlation between three strip-type, colorimetric tests and two laboratory methods with respect to the analysis of salivary buffering. The strip-type tests were saliva-check buffer, Dentobuff strip and CRT(®) Buffer test. The laboratory methods included Ericsson's laboratory method and a monotone acid/base titration to create a reference scale for the salivary titratable acidity. Additionally, defined buffer solutions were prepared and tested to simulate the carbonate, phosphate and protein buffer systems of saliva. The correlation between the methods was analysed by the Spearman's rank test. Disagreement was detected between buffering capacity values obtained with three strip-type tests that was more pronounced in case of saliva samples with medium and low buffering capacities. All strip-type tests were able to assign the hydrogencarbonate, di-hydrogenphosphate and 0.1% protein buffer solutions to the correct buffer categories. However, at 0.6% total protein concentrations, none of the test systems worked accurately. Improvements are necessary for strip-type tests because of certain disagreement with the Ericsson's laboratory method and dependence on the protein content of saliva.

Comparison of bacterial plaque samples from titanium implant and tooth surfaces by different methods

Studies have shown similarities in the microflora between titanium implants or tooth sites when samples are taken by gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) sampling methods. The purpose of the present study was to study the microflora from curette and GCF samples using the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization method to assess the microflora of patients who had at least one oral osseo-integrated implant and who were otherwise dentate. Plaque samples were taken from tooth/implant surfaces and from sulcular gingival surfaces with curettes, and from gingival fluid using filter papers. A total of 28 subjects (11 females) were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the subjects was 64.1 years (SD+/-4.7). On average, the implants studied had been in function for 3.7 years (SD+/-2.9). The proportion of Streptococcus oralis (P<0.02) and Fusobacterium periodonticum (P<0.02) was significantly higher at tooth sites (curette samples). The GCF samples yielded higher proportions for 28/40 species studies (P-values varying between 0.05 and 0.001). The proportions of Tannerella forsythia (T. forsythensis), and Treponema denticola were both higher in GCF samples (P<0.02 and P<0.05, respectively) than in curette samples (implant sites). The microbial composition in gingival fluid from samples taken at implant sites differed partly from that of curette samples taken from implant surfaces or from sulcular soft tissues, providing higher counts for most bacteria studied at implant surfaces, but with the exception of Porphyromonas gingivalis. A combination of GCF and curette sampling methods might be the most representative sample method.

Comparison of five diagnostic methods for detecting bovine viral diarrhea virus infection in calves

Five diagnostic techniques performed on skin biopsies (shoulder region) and/or serum were compared for detection of bovine viral diarrhea virus infection in 224 calves 0-3 months of age, 23 calves older than 3 months but younger than 7 months, and 11 cattle older than 7 months. The diagnostic methods used were immunohistochemistry (IHC), 2 commercial antigen ELISAs, 1 commercial antibody ELISA, and real-time RT-PCR. Results of 249 out of 258 skin and serum samples were identical and correlated within the 3 antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR used. Twenty-six of these 249 samples were BVDV-positive with all antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR. Nine out of 258 samples yielding discordant results were additionally examined by RT-PCR, RT-PCR Reamplification (ReA), and antigen ELISA I on serum and by immunohistochemistry on formalin fixed and paraffin-embedded skin biopsies. Virus isolation and genotyping was performed as well on these discordant samples. In 3 cases, transiently infected animals were identified. Two samples positive by real-time RT-PCR were interpreted as false positive and were ascribed to cross-contamination. The antigen ELISA II failed to detect 2 BVDV-positive calves due to the presence of maternal antibodies; the cause of 2 false-positive cases in this ELISA remained undetermined. Only persistently infected animals were identified in skin samples by IHC or antigen ELISA I. The 3 antigen detection methods and the real-time RT-PCR used in parallel had a high correlation rate (96.5%) and similar sensitivity and specificity values.

Comparison of amplification methods for transcriptomic analyses of low abundance prokaryotic RNA sources

Microarrays have established as instrumental for bacterial detection, identification, and genotyping as well as for transcriptomic studies. For gene expression analyses using limited numbers of bacteria (derived from in vivo or ex vivo origin, for example), RNA amplification is often required prior to labeling and hybridization onto microarrays. Evaluation of the fidelity of the amplification methods is crucial for the robustness and reproducibility of microarray results. We report here the first utilization of random primers and the highly processive Phi29 phage polymerase to amplify material for transcription profiling analyses. We compared two commercial amplification methods (GenomiPhi and MessageAmp kits) with direct reverse-transcription as the reference method, focusing on the robustness of mRNA quantification using either microarrays or quantitative RT-PCR. Both amplification methods using either poly-A tailing followed by in vitro transcription, or direct strand displacement polymerase, showed appreciable linearity. Strand displacement technique was particularly affordable compared to in vitro transcription-based (IVT) amplification methods and consisted in a single tube reaction leading to high amplification yields. Real-time measurements using low-, medium-, and highly expressed genes revealed that this simple method provided linear amplification with equivalent results in terms of relative messenger abundance as those obtained by conventional direct reverse-transcription.

A comparison of ground cover and frequency estimation methods for post-harvest soil monitoring

The amount and type of ground cover is an important characteristic to measure when collecting soil disturbance monitoring data after a timber harvest. Estimates of ground cover and bare soil can be used for tracking changes in invasive species, plant growth and regeneration, woody debris loadings, and the risk of surface water runoff and soil erosion. A new method of assessing ground cover and soil disturbance was recently published by the U.S. Forest Service, the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol (FSDMP). This protocol uses the frequency of cover types in small circular (15cm) plots to compare ground surface in pre- and post-harvest condition. While both frequency and percent cover are common methods of describing vegetation, frequency has rarely been used to measure ground surface cover. In this study, three methods for assessing ground cover percent (step-point, 15cm dia. circular and 1x5m visual plot estimates) were compared to the FSDMP frequency method. Results show that the FSDMP method provides significantly higher estimates of ground surface condition for most soil cover types, except coarse wood. The three cover methods had similar estimates for most cover values. The FSDMP method also produced the highest value when bare soil estimates were used to model erosion risk. In a person-hour analysis, estimating ground cover percent in 15cm dia. plots required the least sampling time, and provided standard errors similar to the other cover estimates even at low sampling intensities (n=18). If ground cover estimates are desired in soil monitoring, then a small plot size (15cm dia. circle), or a step-point method can provide a more accurate estimate in less time than the current FSDMP method.

An empirical comparison of methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy showed hierarchical models are necessary

OBJECTIVE: Meta-analysis of studies of the accuracy of diagnostic tests currently uses a variety of methods. Statistically rigorous hierarchical models require expertise and sophisticated software. We assessed whether any of the simpler methods can in practice give adequately accurate and reliable results. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We reviewed six methods for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy: four simple commonly used methods (simple pooling, separate random-effects meta-analyses of sensitivity and specificity, separate meta-analyses of positive and negative likelihood ratios, and the Littenberg-Moses summary receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve) and two more statistically rigorous approaches using hierarchical models (bivariate random-effects meta-analysis and hierarchical summary ROC curve analysis). We applied the methods to data from a sample of eight systematic reviews chosen to illustrate a variety of patterns of results. RESULTS: In each meta-analysis, there was substantial heterogeneity between the results of different studies. Simple pooling of results gave misleading summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity in some meta-analyses, and the Littenberg-Moses method produced summary ROC curves that diverged from those produced by more rigorous methods in some situations. CONCLUSION: The closely related hierarchical summary ROC curve or bivariate models should be used as the standard method for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.

Comparison of three methods for driven pile capacity

A significant cost for foundations is the design and installation of piles when they are required due to poor ground conditions. Not only is it important that piles be designed properly, but also that the installation equipment and total cost be evaluated. To assist in the evaluation of piles a number of methods have been developed. In this research three of these methods were investigated, which were developed by the Federal Highway Administration, the US Corps of Engineers and the American Petroleum Institute (API). The results from these methods were entered into the program GRLWEAPTM to assess the pile drivability and to provide a standard base for comparing the three methods. An additional element of this research was to develop EXCEL spreadsheets to implement these three methods. Currently the Army Corps and API methods do not have publicly available software and must be performed manually, which requires that data is taken off of figures and tables, which can introduce error in the prediction of pile capacities. Following development of the EXCEL spreadsheet, they were validated with both manual calculations and existing data sets to ensure that the data output is correct. To evaluate the three pile capacity methods data was utilized from four project sites from North America. The data included site geotechnical data along with field determined pile capacities. In order to achieve a standard comparison of the data, the pile capacities and geotechnical data from the three methods were entered into GRLWEAPTM. The sites consisted of both cohesive and cohesionless soils; where one site was primarily cohesive, one was primarily cohesionless, and the other two consisted of inter-bedded cohesive and cohesionless soils. Based on this limited set of data the results indicated that the US Corps of Engineers method more closely compared with the field test data, followed by the API method to a lesser degree. The DRIVEN program compared favorably in cohesive soils, but over predicted in cohesionless material.