Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39884314›Full record

ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2025

Comparison of individualized facial growth prediction models using artificial intelligence and partial least squares based on the Mathews growth collection.

Jeffrey Roseth, Jong-Hak Kim, Jun-Ho Moon, Dong-Yub Ko, Heesoo Oh, Shin-Jae Lee, Heeyeon Suh

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  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

7 authors.

Jeffrey Roseth
Jong-Hak Kim
Jun-Ho Moon
Dong-Yub Ko
Heesoo Oh
Shin-Jae Lee
Heeyeon Suh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop facial growth prediction models using artificial intelligence (AI) under various conditions, and to compare performance of these models with each other as well as with the partial least squares (PLS) growth prediction model. MATERIALS AND

methodsLongitudinal lateral cephalograms from 33 subjects in the Mathews growth collection were utilized. A total of 1257 pairs of before and after growth lateral cephalograms were included. In each image, 46 hard and 32 soft tissue landmarks were manually identified. Growth prediction models were constructed using a deep learning method based on TabNet deep neural network and partial least squares (PLS) method. Prediction accuracies of the two methods were compared.

resultsOn average, artificial intelligence (AI) showed 0.61 mm less prediction error than PLS. Among the 77 predicted landmarks, AI was more accurate than PLS in 60 landmarks. When comparing AI models with varying numbers of training epochs, those with higher epochs yielded more accurate predictions. Overall, PLS and AI exhibited greater prediction errors for soft tissue and mandibular landmarks compared to hard tissue and maxillary landmarks. However, AI showed a smaller increase in prediction error in areas with greater variability.

conclusionsAI proved to be a valuable growth prediction method, with clinically acceptable prediction errors averaging 1.49 mm for 45 hard tissue landmarks and 1.71 mm for 32 soft tissue landmarks. PLS accurately predicted landmarks with low variability. However, AI generally outperformed PLS, particularly for landmarks in the lower part of the craniofacial structure and soft tissue, where uncertainty is considerable.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFaceMaxillofacial DevelopmentAdolescentAnatomic LandmarksCephalometryChildFemaleHumansLeast-Squares AnalysisMaleNeural Networks, ComputerArtificial intelligenceGrowth predictionLongitudinal craniofacial growth recordsPartial least squares

Identifiers

PMID39884314
PMCPMC12017544

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.