Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2026

Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmark Annotation Demonstration on Human Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans
Published on: September 8, 2023
Systematic and random errors associated with Johnston's cephalometric analysis
S D Keeling1, S R Cabassa, G J King
1Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, University of Florida, Gainesville 32610.
Abstract:
This study examined intra- and interexaminer systematic and random errors associated with Johnston's cephalometric method of assessing skeletal and dental changes from pairs of radiographs. Data were obtained from the tracings of radiographs of 30 mixed dentition subjects, who had been treated to correct a Class II malocclusion. Measurements included molar and incisor crown movements relative to basal bone, apical base change, maxillary and mandibular displacement relative to the cranial base, and total molar and overjet reduction. In addition, the change in axial inclination of the incisors and molars was determined. A paired t-test for each pair of replicates for each measure was performed to examine inter- and intra-examiner bias. Estimates of the random error, the coefficient of reliability, and confidence limits (95 per cent level) of a single determination were undertaken. No systematic errors occurred between/within examiners for any linear or angular measure. Interexaminer random errors, based on the standard deviation of the mean difference between replicates, were greater than intra-examiner random errors for 12 out of 13 parameters. Measures assessing molar correction and overjet reduction had the least amount of random error variance within and across judges, while changes in mandibular position had the greatest. Because considerable random errors occurred, the Johnston analysis when used to assess skeletal changes, as well as individual molar and incisor movements, may have limited utility in clinical practice for the individual case.
More Related Videos
05:49Reliability of Artificial Intelligence-Based Cone Beam Computed Tomography Integration with Digital Dental Images
Published on: February 23, 2024
08:03Midface Hypoplasia and Cranial Base Morphology in Syndromic Craniosynostosis: A Comparative Analysis Study Using a Predictive Regression Model
Published on: November 4, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Random and Systematic Errors
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Random Error
Random and Systematic Errors