Imaging science in dentistry · 2026
Expert consensus-based review and refinement of dental radiographic quality management and radiation safety criteria in oral and maxillofacial radiography in Korea: A Delphi study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cho Hyun Jin, Lee Sam-Sun, Kang Ju-Hee, Kim Jo-Eun, Huh Kyung-Hoe, Heo Min-Suk, Choi Soon-Chul, Yeom Han-Gyeol, Jo Gyu-Dong, Lee Chena, Choi Hang-Moon, An Seo-Young
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aimed to establish expert consensus on dental radiographic quality management and radiation safety evaluation items published by the Korean Academy of Oral and Maxillofacial Radiology that lacked formal consensus-based validation, while improving terminological precision and ensuring consistency across evaluation criteria.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Candidate items were systematically extracted from existing evaluation checklists and guidance documents without formally established expert consensus, covering intraoral and extraoral imaging, cone-beam computed tomography, and radiation safety management. A three-round Delphi survey was conducted with eleven specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology. Items were rated on a nine-point scale, and consensus was defined using the following criteria: a mean score of 8.0 or higher, a coefficient of variation of 0.20 or lower, and an agreement rate of 80% or higher. Qualitative feedback was iteratively analyzed to refine item wording and terminology.
RESULTS: The initial 81 items were refined and expanded to 93 items in the second round and 95 items in the third. The proportion of items achieving consensus increased from 75.3% in the first round to 83.9% in the second and 94.7% in the third. The increasing agreement rates indicated progressive convergence of expert opinion across rounds.
CONCLUSION: This study established expert consensus-based criteria for dental radiographic quality assessment and radiation safety management, providing a validated and structured foundation for improving assessment consistency, guiding future guideline development, and supporting standardization in dental radiographic practice.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Candidate items were systematically extracted from existing evaluation checklists and guidance documents without formally established expert consensus, covering intraoral and extraoral imaging, cone-beam computed tomography, and radiation safety management. A three-round Delphi survey was conducted with eleven specialists in oral and maxillofacial radiology. Items were rated on a nine-point scale, and consensus was defined using the following criteria: a mean score of 8.0 or higher, a coefficient of variation of 0.20 or lower, and an agreement rate of 80% or higher. Qualitative feedback was iteratively analyzed to refine item wording and terminology.
RESULTS: The initial 81 items were refined and expanded to 93 items in the second round and 95 items in the third. The proportion of items achieving consensus increased from 75.3% in the first round to 83.9% in the second and 94.7% in the third. The increasing agreement rates indicated progressive convergence of expert opinion across rounds.
CONCLUSION: This study established expert consensus-based criteria for dental radiographic quality assessment and radiation safety management, providing a validated and structured foundation for improving assessment consistency, guiding future guideline development, and supporting standardization in dental radiographic practice.