Background: The aim of the study was to test the validity and reliability of the Perceived Future Decent Work Securement Scale for Turkish nursing students. Methods: A cross-sectional, methodological study design was used. The study was carried out at three nursing undergraduate programs in Turkey during the academic year of 2020–2021 with 336 senior nursing students. Language validity and content validity analyses were performed for the scale adaptation, followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for construct validity. The reliability of the scale was determined using the test-retest and Cronbach's alpha internal consistency coefficient. Results: The scale-content validity index score was 0.988. In CFA, all goodness-of-fit indices verified the acceptable fit of the model; its root mean square error of approximation was 0.076; the normed fit index was 0.909; the standardized mean square residual was 0.097; the relative fit index was 0.881; the goodness-of-fit index was 0.915; the adjusted goodness-of-fit index was 0.872 and χ2/df = 2.932. The overall reliability was α = 0.86. The item-total correlations of the scale were above the acceptable level, and the test-retest analysis had a high correlation. The access to healthcare (14.68, SD 3.53) obtained the highest average score, and the adequate compensation (8.52, SD 3.76) was the lowest rated by the senior nursing students. Conclusion The Perceived Future Decent Work Securement Scale is a valid and reliable scale to assess nursing students' future decent work securement.

Purpose: This study compared the effectiveness of complementary metal-oxide semiconductors (CMOS) and photostimulable phosphor (PSP) plates as intraoral imaging systems in terms of time efficacy, patient comfort, and subjective image quality assessment in real clinical settings. Materials and Methods: Fifty-eight patients (25 women and 33 men) were included. Patients were referred for a full-mouth radiological examination including 1 bitewing radiograph (left and right) and 8 periapical radiographs for each side (left maxilla/mandible and right maxilla/mandible). For each patient, 1 side of the dental arch was radiographed using a CMOS detector, whereas the other side was radiographed using a PSP detector, ensuring an equal number of left and right arches imaged by each detector. Clinical application time, comfort/pain, and subjective image quality were assessed for each detector. Continuous variables were summarized as mean±standard deviation. Differences between detectors were evaluated using repeated-measures analysis of variance. P<0.05 was accepted as significant. Results: The mean total time required for all imaging procedures with the CMOS detector was significantly lower than the mean total time required for imaging procedures with PSP (P<0.05). The overall mean patient comfort scores for the CMOS and PSP detectors were 4.57 and 4.48, respectively, without a statistically significant difference (P>0.05). The performance of both observers in subjectively assessing structures was significantly higher when using CMOS images than when using PSP images for all regions (P<0.05). Conclusion The CMOS detector was found to be superior to the PSP detector in terms of clinical time efficacy and subjective image quality.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the ex vivo diagnostic ability of 9 different cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) settings in the detection of recurrent caries under amalgam restorations in primary teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-two primary teeth were used. Twenty-six teeth had dentine caries and 26 teeth did not have dentine caries. Black class II cavities were prepared and restored with amalgam. In the 26 carious teeth, recurrent caries were left under restorations. The other 26 intact teeth that did not have caries served as controls. Teeth were imaged using a 100×90-mm field of view and a 0.2-mm voxel size with 9 different CBCT settings. Four observers assessed the images using a 5-point scale. Kappa values were calculated to assess observer agreement. CBCT settings were compared with the gold standard using a receiver operating characteristic analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) values for each setting were compared using the chi-square test, with a significance level of α=.05. RESULTS: Intraobserver kappa values ranged from 0.366 to 0.664 for observer 1, from 0.311 to 0.447 for observer 2, from 0.597 to 1.000 for observer 3, and from 0.869 to 1 for observer 4. Furthermore, interobserver kappa values among the observers ranged from 0.133 to 0.814 for the first reading and from 0.197 to 0.805 for the second reading. The highest AUC values were found for setting 5 (0.5916) and setting 3 (0.5886), and were not found to be statistically significant (P>.05). CONCLUSION: Variations in tube voltage and tube current did not affect the detection of recurrent caries under amalgam restorations in primary teeth.
Area Under Curve ; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography* ; Dental Caries ; Dentin ; Diagnosis ; ROC Curve ; Tooth ; Tooth, Deciduous*