METHODS: The norm-referenced method of standard setting was applied to the real scores of 40 final-year dental students on a multiple-choice question (MCQ), a short answer question (SAQ), and an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). A panel of 10 judges set the standard using the modified-Angoff method for the same paper in one sitting. One judge set the passing score of 10 OSCE questions after 2 weeks. A comparison of the grades and pass/fail rates derived from the absolute standard, norm-referenced, and modified-Angoff methods was made. The intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities of the modified-Angoff method were assessed.
RESULTS: The passing rate for the absolute standard was 100% (40/40), for the norm-referenced method it was 62.5% (25/40), and for the modified-Angoff method it was 80% (32/40). The modified-Angoff method had good inter-rater reliability of 0.876 and excellent test-retest reliability of 0.941.
CONCLUSION: There were significant differences in the outcomes of these three standard-setting methods, as shown by the difference in the proportion of candidates who passed and failed the assessment. The modified-Angoff method was found to have good reliability for use with a professional qualifying dental examination.
METHODS: 3-T brain MRI and DTI (diffusion tensor imaging) were performed on 26 PD and 13 MSA patients. Regions of interest (ROIs) were the putamen, substantia nigra, pons, middle cerebellar peduncles (MCP) and cerebellum. Linear, volumetry and DTI (fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity) were measured. A three-node decision tree was formulated, with design goals being 100 % specificity at node 1, 100 % sensitivity at node 2 and highest combined sensitivity and specificity at node 3.
RESULTS: Nine parameters (mean width, fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) of MCP; anteroposterior diameter of pons; cerebellar FA and volume; pons and mean putamen volume; mean FA substantia nigra compacta-rostral) showed statistically significant (P < 0.05) differences between MSA and PD with mean MCP width, anteroposterior diameter of pons and mean FA MCP chosen for the decision tree. Threshold values were 14.6 mm, 21.8 mm and 0.55, respectively. Overall performance of the decision tree was 92 % sensitivity, 96 % specificity, 92 % PPV and 96 % NPV. Twelve out of 13 MSA patients were accurately classified.
CONCLUSION: Formation of the decision tree using these parameters was both descriptive and predictive in differentiating between MSA and PD.
KEY POINTS: • Parkinson's disease and multiple system atrophy can be distinguished on MR imaging. • Combined conventional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging improves the accuracy of diagnosis. • A decision tree is descriptive and predictive in differentiating between clinical entities. • A decision tree can reliably differentiate Parkinson's disease from multiple system atrophy.