Reliability of Sawai’s classification for dental cervical abrasions: A pilot study

Table 1 MS photography based evaluation and FA photography based evaluation Crosstab

		FA photography based evaluation								Total	Measure of agreement, χ value
		Class A			Class B			Class C
		Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II
MS Photography based evaluation	Class A Type I	12	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0.899
	Class A Type II	1	10	0	0	1	0	0	1	13
	Class A Type III	0	0	4	0	0	0	0	0	4
	Class B Type I	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	2
	Class B Type II	0	0	0	0	9	0	0	0	9
	Class B Type III	0	0	0	0	0	7	0	0	7
	Class C Type II	0	0	0	0	0	2	6	0	8
	Class C Type III	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	14	15
Total		13	10	4	2	10	10	6	15	70

Table 2 MS photography based evaluation and SC photography Crosstab

		SC photography								Total	Measure of agreement, χ value
		Class A			Class B			Class C
		Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II
MS Photography based evaluation	Class A Type I	12	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	12	0.899
	Class A Type II	0	11	0	0	0	0	2	0	13
	Class A Type III	0	0	3	0	0	0	0	1	4
	Class B Type I	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	2
	Class B Type II	0	0	0	0	8	0	1	0	9
	Class B Type III	0	0	0	0	0	6	1	0	7
	Class C Type II	1	0	0	0	0	0	7	0	8
	Class C Type III	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	15	15
Total		13	11	3	2	8	6	11	16	70

Table 3 FA photography based evaluation and SC photography Cross tabulation

		SC photography								Total	Measure of agreement, χ value
		Class A			Class B			Class C
		Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II	Type III	Type I	Type II
MS Photography based evaluation	Class A Type I	12	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	13	0.832
	Class A Type II	0	9	0	0	0	0	1	0	10
	Class A Type III	0	0	3	0	0	0	0	1	4
	Class B Type I	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	2
	Class B Type II	0	1	0	0	8	0	1	0	10
	Class B Type III	1	0	0	0	0	6	2	1	10
	Class C Type II	0	0	0	0	0	0	6	0	6
	Class C Type III	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	14	15
Total		13	11	3	2	8	6	11	16	70