Research Article
Accuracy of Four Tooth Size Prediction Methods on Malay Population
Table 3
Comparison between actual and predicted values for each tested method. Male samplesa.
| Actual (mm) (C + P1 + P2) Mean (SD) | Tested methods | | Predicted (mm) (C + P1 + P2) Mean (SD) | Actual-predicted mean differenceb (mm) (95% CI) | P value* |
| Maxilla = 22.82 (1.02)
| Moyers 50% | Maxilla | 22.71 (0.86) | 0.11 (−0.09, 0.32) | 0.28 | Mandible | 22.36 (0.91) | −0.49 (−0.68, −0.31) | <0.001 | Tanaka and Johnston | Maxilla | 22.64 (0.77) | 0.18 (−0.02, 0.38) | 0.08 | Mandible | 22.14 (0.77) | −0.28 (−0.45, −0.1) | <0.01 | Mandible = 21.87 (1.03)
| Ling and Wong | Maxilla | 23.14 (0.77) | −0.32 (−0.52, −0.12) | <0.001 | Mandible | 22.25 (0.77) | −0.39 (−0.56, −0.21) | <0.01 | Jaroontham and Godfrey | Maxilla | 22.90 (0.63) | −0.09 (−0.28, 0.11) | 0.47 | Mandible | 21.93 (0.67) | −0.07 (−0.25, 0.11) | 0.40 |
|
|
a Sample size: 120.
b Independent test.
*Significant at .
|