Remote Online vs. Onsite Rating of GOSLON Yardstick Using Digital Models

ObjectivesTo assess the reliability of remote online GOSLON yardstick rating compared to a traditional onsite setting using a photogallery of a 3D dental model.DesignCrossover study.PatientsThe inclusion criteria are patients with a non-syndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate, with the models taken during mixed dentition, prior to any orthodontic treatment. 34 patients participated in this study.InterventionsA panel of 3 assessors rated a photogallery of digital models using the GOSLON yardstick in both onsite and remote online settings.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe level of agreement between the two settings, intra- and interrater reliability, was assessed using Cohen's weighted kappa statistics (κ), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ).ResultsThe level of agreement between remote online and onsite ratings exhibited a very good level of agreement (κ > 0.83; ICC > 0.95; ρ > 0.94). In addition, intrarater agreement for both rating methods also showed a very good level of agreement (κ > 0.81; ICC > 0.91; ρ > 0.94).ConclusionThis study demonstrated a very good level of agreement and correlation between the GOSLON scores of both viewing settings. This suggests that the difference in the setting, viewing environment, and device does not affect the GOSLON score results. Therefore, remote online rating is as reliable as onsite rating.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Published
2025-07-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10556656251359503
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Remote Online vs. Onsite Rating of GOSLON Yardstick Using Digital Models

Theerasak Nakornnoi, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Yodhathai Satravaha, Natchalee Srimaneekarn et al.
2 citations
The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
3.63
article

Remote Online vs. Onsite Rating of GOSLON Yardstick Using Digital Models

Theerasak Nakornnoi, Supakit Peanchitlertkajorn, Yodhathai Satravaha, Natchalee Srimaneekarn, Supatchai Boonpratham, Chaiyapol Chaweewannakorn, Ploy Busagornruangrat
article en
2 citations

Abstract

ObjectivesTo assess the reliability of remote online GOSLON yardstick rating compared to a traditional onsite setting using a photogallery of a 3D dental model.DesignCrossover study.PatientsThe inclusion criteria are patients with a non-syndromic complete unilateral cleft lip and palate, with the models taken during mixed dentition, prior to any orthodontic treatment. 34 patients participated in this study.InterventionsA panel of 3 assessors rated a photogallery of digital models using the GOSLON yardstick in both onsite and remote online settings.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe level of agreement between the two settings, intra- and interrater reliability, was assessed using Cohen's weighted kappa statistics (κ), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ).ResultsThe level of agreement between remote online and onsite ratings exhibited a very good level of agreement (κ > 0.83; ICC > 0.95; ρ > 0.94). In addition, intrarater agreement for both rating methods also showed a very good level of agreement (κ > 0.81; ICC > 0.91; ρ > 0.94).ConclusionThis study demonstrated a very good level of agreement and correlation between the GOSLON scores of both viewing settings. This suggests that the difference in the setting, viewing environment, and device does not affect the GOSLON score results. Therefore, remote online rating is as reliable as onsite rating.

The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal
Mahidol University (TH)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Cleft Lip and Palate Research
3.63
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.