For COI, mean percentages between clades ranges from 2.15% (between clades II and III) to 5.23% (between clades I and VI).
Treating health centres as the unit of analysis, we compared the quality of care (based on mean percentages) between regions using linear regression models (Tables 2 and 4).
Estimated mean percentage difference between the right and left first upper molar for total root volume and mesial root volume.
Estimated mean percentage difference between the length of the upper right and left first molar mesial roots.
Estimated mean percentage difference between the linear measurements of alveolar bone loss (m-AB, f-AB and d-AB) of the upper right and left first molars.
The mean percentage difference between unfiltered PSF and OSEM reconstructions for isocontour-based MATVs was 51.5% (95% CI −1.1 to 104; Fig. 4a).
The mean percentage difference between the unfiltered PSF and OSEM reconstructions for isocontour-based MATVs was 2.7%95%5% CI −15.5 to 21.9; Fig. 4c).
The mean percentage deviation between the field temperature data and the temperature data from regression relations is estimated by Eq. 3.
In this case, the mean percentage error between the actual radius and the estimated size is around 2.35 % with a standard deviation of 1.83 % and is less than 5%% in most (91 %) cases.
Mean percentage difference between SULmax (a) and SULpeak (b) obtained with a conventional OSEM algorithm and those obtained with PSF ± TOF reconstructions are shown before and after application of the EQ.PET methodology.
