Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing CBCT and Digital Dental Image Integration with AI-Assisted Digitization
Published on: February 23, 2024
Populational influence on cephalometric landmark identification: performance of two AI-driven software programs in
Thaisa Pinheiro Silva1, Giovanna Sachs Puntigam2, Maria Fernanda Silva Andrade-Bortoletto2
1Department of Oral Diagnosis, Division of Oral Radiology, Piracicaba Dental School, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, 13414-903, Brazil. thaisapinheirosilva@hotmail.com.
Objective:
To assess the performance of cephalometric landmark identification performed by two AI-driven software programs in images from different populations (Brazilian and Korean).
Methods:
Sixty lateral cephalometric radiographs (30 Brazilian and 30 Korean) were analyzed. The Brazilian images were acquired using the Orthophos XG 5/Ceph device, while the Korean images were obtained from the International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging 2015 database. Images of patients with permanent dentition were included, excluding those with poor head positioning or severe craniofacial deformities. Twenty cephalometric landmarks were identified by two examiners used as the reference standard. Two AI-driven software programs, CefBot™ (Brazil) and WebCeph™ (Korea), automatically identified the same landmarks. Coordinate values for each landmark were measured using ImageJ, and the data were analyzed with Analysis of Variance and Dunnett's post-hoc test.
Results:
The Brazilian software showed high accuracy in identifying landmarks on Brazilian images (90%) but was less precise on Korean images (80%), with significant discrepancies in the Glabella, Menton L, Basion, and Orbitale landmarks. Similarly, the Korean software had a higher accuracy in its own population (95%) than in another population (85%), with notable inaccuracies in the Menton L, Basion, and Porion landmarks.
Conclusion:
Discrepancies in the identification of specific landmarks, such as Glabella and Menton L, suggest that the accuracy of the software may be influenced by the training process itself and by the population origin of the training data.
More Related Videos
10:23Author Spotlight: Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmark Annotation Demonstration on Human Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans
Published on: September 8, 2023
07:32Author Spotlight: 3D Movement Assessment of Maxillary Posterior Teeth in Clear Aligner Treatment
Published on: February 23, 2024