ArticleHeliyon2023
Automatic recognition of cephalometric landmarks via multi-scale sampling strategy.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Can artificial intelligence-driven cephalometric analysis replace manual tracing? A systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of orthodontics · 2024Pooled it
- Applications of artificial intelligence in diagnosis and treatment planning of orthodontics: a narrative review.The Saudi dental journal · 2025Review
- The Accuracy of Algorithms Used by Artificial Intelligence in Cephalometric Points Detection: A Systematic Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The identification of head landmarks in cephalometric analysis significantly contributes in the anatomical localization of maxillofacial tissues for orthodontic and orthognathic surgery. However, the existing methods face the limitations of low accuracy and cumbersome identification process. In this pursuit, the present study proposed an automatic target recognition algorithm called Multi-Scale YOLOV3 (MS-YOLOV3) for the detection of cephalometric landmarks. It was characterized by multi-scale sampling strategies for shallow and deep features at varied resolutions, and especially contained the module of spatial pyramid pooling (SPP) for highest resolution. The proposed method was quantitatively and qualitatively compared with the classical YOLOV3 algorithm on the two data sets of public lateral cephalograms, undisclosed anterior-posterior (AP) cephalograms, respectively, for evaluating the performance. The proposed MS-YOLOV3 algorithm showed better robustness with successful detection rates (SDR) of 80.84% within 2 mm, 93.75% within 3 mm, and 98.14% within 4 mm for lateral cephalograms, and 85.75% within 2 mm, 92.87% within 3 mm, and 96.66% within 4 mm for AP cephalograms, respectively. It was concluded that the proposed model could be robustly used to label the cephalometric landmarks on both lateral and AP cephalograms for the clinical application in orthodontic and orthognathic surgery.
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.