ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2015
Sizing the shape: understanding morphometrics.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- CSGM: A R Package to Conduct a Robust Cross-Sectional Geometric Morphometric Analysis.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026Article
- Cracking the Code: Computational Image Analysis Tools for Histopathological and Morphometric Insights.Journal of imaging · 2026Review
- Influence of body mass index on facial soft tissue morphology in growing non-obese children.European journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOne of the most fundamental limitations associated with the conventional cephalometrics is its inability to delineate size from shape as it depends mainly on linear and angular measurements. However, the biological structures warrant greater description in terms of shape and form for better comparison of variation in a particular population. To overcome these shortcomings, morphometrics are now being employed for describing the biological structures in terms of quantifying the shape and form. Also, statistical analysis is being applied to find the variability of this form in the population. The present paper assesses the use of the Procuste superimposition technique and the subsequent form analysis by the principal component analysis (PCA). MATERIALS AND
methodsThe lateral cephalograms of 10 adult females were taken from existing records, traced & digitized & then superimposed by means of procuste superimposition. A comparison was made with the conventional superimposition methods based on arbitrary reference planes like cranial base, FHP, SN. The statistical analysis for assessment of shape variability of the structures seen on the lateral cephalogram was done by calculating the principal components for 3 out of these 10 samples.
resultsThe conventional superimposition methods do not provide realistic picture of variation in the biological structures as they themselves are prone to variability even in a particular population.
conclusionConcepts in Morphometrics can be applied for the purpose of orthodontic assessment of a particular patient with regards to his craniofacial morphology. With the help of morphometrics, norms for a population can be determined based on all the kinds of variations present naturally in that particular population & individuals can thus be compared more realistically regarding the morphological variations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.