The field epidemiology training programmes (FETPs) of Indonesia and Japan collaboratively conducted a surveillance evaluation in Indonesia following universal guidelines. This experience could serve as a meaningful milestone with potential applications for FETPs in other countries, thereby strengthening the FETP network and ultimately enhancing global health security.

Background: The diagnosis of thyroid neoplasms necessitates the identification of distinct histological features. Various education/hospital centers located in cities across Indonesia likely result in discordances among pathologists when diagnosing thyroid neoplasms. Methods: This study examined the concordance among Indonesian pathologists in assessing nuclear features and capsular and vascular invasion of thyroid tumors. Fifteen pathologists from different centers independently assessed the same 14 digital slides of thyroid tumor specimens. All the specimens were thyroid neoplasms with known BRAFV600E and RAS mutational status, from a single center. We evaluated the pre- and post-training agreement using the Fleiss kappa. The significance of the training was evaluated using a paired T-test. Results: Baseline agreement on nuclear features was slight to fair based on a 3-point scoring system (k = 0.14 to 0.28) and poor to fair based on an eight-point system (k = –0.02 to 0.24). Agreements on vascular (κ = 0.35) and capsular invasion (κ = 0.27) were fair, whereas the estimated molecular type showed substantial agreement (κ = 0.74). Following the training, agreement using the eight-point system significantly improved (p = 0.001). Conclusions The level of concordance among Indonesian pathologists in diagnosing thyroid neoplasm was relatively poor. Consensus in pathology assessment requires ongoing collaboration and education to refine diagnostic criteria.

Background: This systematic review aimed to determine whether cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic radiography (PR) yield consistent results in determining the degree of impacted lower third molar teeth based on existing classification parameters. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PLOS One, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additionally, a manual search was also carried out. There were no restrictions on publication dates, allowing a broader scope of literature. Only articles published in English were eligible for inclusion. Furthermore, all studies that compared the outcomes of CBCT and panoramic images concerning the position of impacted teeth, according to the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications, were included. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. One study used the Pell & Gregory classification to assess differences, finding a significant result (P< 0.001). Two studies used both the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications. In these assessments, one study found no significant differences in the Winter classification (p= 1.000) or the Pell & Gregory assessment (p= 0.500). However, another study identified significant differences using both the winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications (P< 0.001). One study conducted an assessment using only Winter classification and found no significant differences between PR and CBCT (P> 0.05). Conclusion There are inter-modality differences in the agreement concerning the degree of impaction of the third molar when using CBCT compared with panoramic imaging across various classification levels. Improved assessment methods are necessary to determine the most appropriate imaging modality for therapeutic management.

Background: This systematic review aimed to determine whether cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic radiography (PR) yield consistent results in determining the degree of impacted lower third molar teeth based on existing classification parameters. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PLOS One, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additionally, a manual search was also carried out. There were no restrictions on publication dates, allowing a broader scope of literature. Only articles published in English were eligible for inclusion. Furthermore, all studies that compared the outcomes of CBCT and panoramic images concerning the position of impacted teeth, according to the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications, were included. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. One study used the Pell & Gregory classification to assess differences, finding a significant result (P< 0.001). Two studies used both the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications. In these assessments, one study found no significant differences in the Winter classification (p= 1.000) or the Pell & Gregory assessment (p= 0.500). However, another study identified significant differences using both the winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications (P< 0.001). One study conducted an assessment using only Winter classification and found no significant differences between PR and CBCT (P> 0.05). Conclusion There are inter-modality differences in the agreement concerning the degree of impaction of the third molar when using CBCT compared with panoramic imaging across various classification levels. Improved assessment methods are necessary to determine the most appropriate imaging modality for therapeutic management.

Background: The diagnosis of thyroid neoplasms necessitates the identification of distinct histological features. Various education/hospital centers located in cities across Indonesia likely result in discordances among pathologists when diagnosing thyroid neoplasms. Methods: This study examined the concordance among Indonesian pathologists in assessing nuclear features and capsular and vascular invasion of thyroid tumors. Fifteen pathologists from different centers independently assessed the same 14 digital slides of thyroid tumor specimens. All the specimens were thyroid neoplasms with known BRAFV600E and RAS mutational status, from a single center. We evaluated the pre- and post-training agreement using the Fleiss kappa. The significance of the training was evaluated using a paired T-test. Results: Baseline agreement on nuclear features was slight to fair based on a 3-point scoring system (k = 0.14 to 0.28) and poor to fair based on an eight-point system (k = –0.02 to 0.24). Agreements on vascular (κ = 0.35) and capsular invasion (κ = 0.27) were fair, whereas the estimated molecular type showed substantial agreement (κ = 0.74). Following the training, agreement using the eight-point system significantly improved (p = 0.001). Conclusions The level of concordance among Indonesian pathologists in diagnosing thyroid neoplasm was relatively poor. Consensus in pathology assessment requires ongoing collaboration and education to refine diagnostic criteria.

Background: This systematic review aimed to determine whether cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and panoramic radiography (PR) yield consistent results in determining the degree of impacted lower third molar teeth based on existing classification parameters. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and PLOS One, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Additionally, a manual search was also carried out. There were no restrictions on publication dates, allowing a broader scope of literature. Only articles published in English were eligible for inclusion. Furthermore, all studies that compared the outcomes of CBCT and panoramic images concerning the position of impacted teeth, according to the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications, were included. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria. One study used the Pell & Gregory classification to assess differences, finding a significant result (P< 0.001). Two studies used both the Winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications. In these assessments, one study found no significant differences in the Winter classification (p= 1.000) or the Pell & Gregory assessment (p= 0.500). However, another study identified significant differences using both the winter and the Pell & Gregory classifications (P< 0.001). One study conducted an assessment using only Winter classification and found no significant differences between PR and CBCT (P> 0.05). Conclusion There are inter-modality differences in the agreement concerning the degree of impaction of the third molar when using CBCT compared with panoramic imaging across various classification levels. Improved assessment methods are necessary to determine the most appropriate imaging modality for therapeutic management.

Background: The diagnosis of thyroid neoplasms necessitates the identification of distinct histological features. Various education/hospital centers located in cities across Indonesia likely result in discordances among pathologists when diagnosing thyroid neoplasms. Methods: This study examined the concordance among Indonesian pathologists in assessing nuclear features and capsular and vascular invasion of thyroid tumors. Fifteen pathologists from different centers independently assessed the same 14 digital slides of thyroid tumor specimens. All the specimens were thyroid neoplasms with known BRAFV600E and RAS mutational status, from a single center. We evaluated the pre- and post-training agreement using the Fleiss kappa. The significance of the training was evaluated using a paired T-test. Results: Baseline agreement on nuclear features was slight to fair based on a 3-point scoring system (k = 0.14 to 0.28) and poor to fair based on an eight-point system (k = –0.02 to 0.24). Agreements on vascular (κ = 0.35) and capsular invasion (κ = 0.27) were fair, whereas the estimated molecular type showed substantial agreement (κ = 0.74). Following the training, agreement using the eight-point system significantly improved (p = 0.001). Conclusions The level of concordance among Indonesian pathologists in diagnosing thyroid neoplasm was relatively poor. Consensus in pathology assessment requires ongoing collaboration and education to refine diagnostic criteria.