Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Automatic cephalometric analysis.

Rosalia Leonardi1, Daniela Giordano, Francesco Maiorana

  • 1Department of Orthodontics, University of Catania, University of Catania, Catania, Italy. rleonard@unict.it

The Angle Orthodontist
|January 16, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Bioactive Molecules from Extreme Environments III.

Marine drugs·2026
Same author

Antioxidant, Anti-Inflammatory and Anticancer Peptides from Extreme Marine Environments.

Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland)·2026
Same author

Orthodontists' Perceptions, Attitudes, and Adoption of Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review.

Dentistry journal·2026
Same author

Assemblage structure of ichthyoplankton communities in the southern tyrrhenian sea (western mediterranean sea).

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Correction to: Multi-center evaluation of radiomics and deep learning to stratify malignancy risk of IPMNs.

Abdominal radiology (New York)·2026
Same author

Uncertainty-Aware Explainable AI for Pancreatic Cysts: Identifying Deep Learning Vulnerabilities and Ensuring Safe Clinical Triage in IPMN Management.

Research square·2026
Same journal

Impact of cone-beam computed tomography image quality on artificial intelligence-driven three-dimensional tooth segmentation and evaluation of external apical root resorption.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same journal

Bracket transfer accuracy of two three-dimensionally printed lingual indirect bonding trays with different bracket frame designs.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same journal

Biomechanical impact of beveling design on extrusion of a maxillary canine and a maxillary first molar: an in vitro and finite element analysis study.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same journal

Effectiveness of resin-modified glass ionomer vs composite bonding agents for orthodontic bonding: a single-center randomized controlled trial.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same journal

Plastic deformation evaluation of clear aligners exposed to different cleaning solutions.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
Same journal

Quantitative evaluation of an artificial intelligence-driven remote monitoring system for occlusion assessment using patient-captured images.

The Angle orthodontist·2026
See all related articles

Automatic cephalogram landmarking techniques show varied success rates. Hybrid approaches offer higher accuracy, but current systems are not clinically reliable due to errors exceeding manual tracing.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Imaging
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Orthodontics

Background:

  • Cephalograms are crucial for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.
  • Manual landmark identification on cephalograms is time-consuming and prone to inter-observer variability.
  • Automated landmarking aims to improve efficiency and reproducibility.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To systematically review techniques for automatic cephalogram landmarking.
  • To evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, and success rates of different automated methods.
  • To assess the clinical applicability of current automatic landmarking systems.

Main Methods:

  • Comprehensive literature search of Medline, IEEE, and ISI Web of Science databases (1966-2006).
  • Inclusion criteria focused on studies reporting accuracy of automatic landmark recognition.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Eight articles met the inclusion criteria after screening 118 initial results.

    • Main Results:

    • Significant heterogeneity was observed in the performance of techniques for detecting the same cephalometric points.
    • Hybrid approaches demonstrated higher accuracy in detecting cephalometric points compared to model-based, image filtering, knowledge-based, and soft-computing methods.
    • Accuracy varied considerably across different landmark detection techniques.

    Conclusions:

    • Current automatic landmarking systems lack the accuracy required for routine clinical use.
    • Errors in automatic landmark detection often exceed those of manual tracing.
    • The scientific evidence supporting the widespread clinical adoption of automatic cephalogram landmarking is currently insufficient.