Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37672141›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2023

Orthodontic craniofacial pattern diagnosis: cephalometric geometry and machine learning.

Yuqing Zhou, Bochun Mao, Jiwu Zhang, Yanheng Zhou, Jing Li, Qiguo Rong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Yuqing ZhouDepartment of Mechanics and Engineering Science, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100081, China.
Bochun MaoDepartment of Orthodontics, Peking University School of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, 100081, China.
Jiwu ZhangDepartment of Mechanics and Engineering Science, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100081, China.
Yanheng ZhouDepartment of Orthodontics, Peking University School of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, 100081, China.
Jing LiDepartment of Orthodontics, Peking University School of Stomatology & National Center of Stomatology & National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases & National Engineering Research Center of Oral Biomaterials and Digital Medical Devices & Beijing Key Laboratory of Digital Stomatology, Beijing, 100081, China. Lijing1101@hotmail.com.
Qiguo RongDepartment of Mechanics and Engineering Science, College of Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, 100081, China. qrong@pku.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9209-730X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efficient and reliable diagnosis of craniofacial patterns is critical to orthodontic treatment. Although machine learning (ML) is time-saving and high-precision, prior knowledge should validate its reliability. This study proposed a craniofacial ML diagnostic workflow base on a cephalometric geometric model through clinical verification. A cephalometric geometric model was established to determine the landmark location by analyzing 408 X-ray lateral cephalograms. Through geometric information and feature engineering, nine supervised ML algorithms were conducted for sagittal and vertical skeleton patterns. After dimension reduction, plane decision boundary and landmark contribution contours were depicted to demonstrate the diagnostic consistency and the consistency with clinical norms. As a result, multi-layer perceptron achieved 97.56% accuracy for sagittal, while linear support vector machine reached 90.24% for the vertical. Sagittal diagnoses showed average superiority (91.60 ± 5.43)% over the vertical (82.25 ± 6.37)%, where discriminative algorithms exhibited more steady performance (93.20 ± 3.29)% than the generative (85.98 ± 9.48)%. Further, the Kruskal-Wallis H test was carried out to explore statistical differences in diagnoses. Though sagittal patterns had no statistical difference in diagnostic accuracy, the vertical showed significance. All aspects of the tests indicated that the proposed craniofacial ML workflow was highly consistent with clinical norms and could supplement practical diagnosis.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMachine LearningCephalometryRadiographyReproducibility of ResultsCephalometric geometryCraniofacial pattern diagnosisDiagnostic accuracyMachine learningOrthodontic lateral landmark

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.