Skip to main content
. 2012 Aug 29;2012:371595. doi: 10.1155/2012/371595

Table 1.

Cross-tables showing the relationship between the different methods and the gold standard.

Gold standard (clinical lesion depth)
0 1 2 3 4 Total
ICDAS-II scores
 0 (sound) 13 0 0 0 0 13
 1-2 (enamel lesion) 0 13 16 8 4 41
 3–6 (dentine lesion) 0 0 2 9 19 30

Total 13 13 18 17 23 84

LF scores*
 0–7 (sound) 12 9 10 2 1 34
 8–24 (enamel lesion) 1 2 6 9 6 24
 25–99 (dentine lesion) 0 2 2 6 16 26

Total 13 13 18 17 23 84

FC scores**
 0–0.9 (sound) 1 0 0 0 0 1
 >0.9–2 (enamel lesion) 12 13 18 16 13 72
 >2 (dentine lesion) 0 0 0 1 6 7

Total 13 13 18 17 19 80

FC scores***
 0–1.2 (sound) 13 8 4 0 0 25
 1.3–1.4 (enamel lesion) 0 4 5 2 0 11
 >1.4 (dentine lesion) 0 1 9 15 19 44

Total 13 13 18 17 19 80

Bitewing scores
 0 (sound) 12 12 16 16 13 69
 1-2 (enamel lesion) 0 0 0 0 0 0
 3-4 (dentine lesion) 1 1 2 1 10 15

Total 13 13 18 17 23 84

*Cutoffs according to the literature [4].

**Cutoffs according to the manufacturer's recommendation.

***Cutoffs according to the literature [5].