ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2025
Reliability assessment of craniofacial and airway measurements: a comparative study between multidetector computed tomography and cone-beam computed tomography.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of 3D radiological skull measurements: reoriented sections and geometric correction versus caliper reference.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Pharyngeal Airway Volume Changes and Patient-Reported Breathing and Sleep Comfort Following Class II Functional Orthodontic Treatment, Predominantly the Herbst Therapy, in Growing Children: A Retrospective CBCT Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Geometric plane alignment as a methodological requirement for accurate angular measurement in three-dimensional craniofacial imaging.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- 3D Computerised Analysis of Airway Morphology in Subjects From Tamil Nadu: A Pilot Study.Cureus · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the intra- and inter-examiner reliability of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using Amira and Dolphin software analyses for craniofacial/airway measurements by six examiners. MATERIALS AND
methodsFive adults and one dry skull with CBCT and MDCT scan files were duplicated and randomly numbered. Six orthodontic residents imported these files into two software programs, oriented the images, set thresholds, and performed 26 measurements. Intra- and inter-examiner reliabilities were determined by using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and presented with scatterplots.
resultsVariables including anterior nasal width, posterior nasal width, frontomaxillary suture right-to-left, inner nasal contour point right-to-left, and minimum cross-sectional area in the oropharynx showed "moderate" to "substantial" intra- or inter-examiner agreement. Amira provided relatively reliable airway assessment, while Dolphin showed standard deviations 10 to 30 times larger for volumetric airway measurements. MDCT scans significantly reduced airway volume/area measurements compared to CBCT, except for intraoral airway volume.
conclusionsUnreliable skeletal measurements and low reliability of Dolphin for airway analysis discourage using CT to quantitatively correlate changes in craniofacial structures with airway dimensions.
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.