MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131215853 · doi:10.2319/090413-652.1

Reliability of anatomic structures as landmarks in three-dimensional cephalometric analysis using CBCT

2013· article· en· W2131215853 on OpenAlexaff
Pegah Naji, Noura Alsufyani, Manuel O. Lagravère

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Angle Orthodontist · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Radiography and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandmarkCone beam computed tomographyOrthodonticsIntraclass correlationRadiographyCondyleCephalometric analysisMathematicsAnatomyArtificial intelligenceMedicineNuclear medicineComputer scienceReproducibilityComputed tomographyRadiologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify anatomic structures in three dimensions and examine their reliability to be used as landmarks in a three-dimensional coordinate cephalometric analysis, using cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty CBCT images were randomly selected for landmark location. Forty-two anatomic landmarks, which are not included in the traditional cephalometric landmarks, were chosen based on radiographic characteristics that make them pragmatic to mark in the CBCT image slices. The principal investigator marked the full set of landmarks on the software by navigating in the X, Y, and Z axes for every image three times, with each measurement trial being at least 1 week apart. One other investigator also located the landmarks once for each image for reliability purposes. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to analyze the mean differences in landmark location in all axes. RESULTS: Intra- and interexaminer reliability for x, y, and z coordinates for all landmarks had ICC greater than 0.95 with confidence interval of 0.88-0.99. Mean measurement differences found were <1.4 mm for all landmarks in all three coordinates. Mean measurement error differences obtained in the principal investigator's trials were primarily <0.5 mm. CONCLUSION: The most reliable and reproducible landmarks tested for use in CBCT are mental foramina, infraorbital foramina, inferior hamulus, dens axis, foramina transversarium of atlas, medial and lateral condyles of the mandible, superior clinoid processes, and mid-clinoid.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations69
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Angle OrthodontistSame topicDental Radiography and ImagingFrench-language works237,207