ArticleOrthodontics & craniofacial research2025
Development of Artificial Intelligence-Supported Automatic Three-Dimensional Surface Cephalometry.
Article in Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep learning-based automated positioning system for maxillary skeletal expander: development and clinical validation.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Automatic identification of anatomical landmarks in three-dimensional computed tomography/cone-beam computed tomography: a scoping review.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSurface-based three-dimensional (3D) cephalometry provides detailed clinical information for the analysis of craniofacial structures. This study aimed to develop an automated 3D surface cephalometry system using mesh fitting based on landmarks identified by artificial intelligence (AI) and to evaluate its accuracy.
methodsA total of 185 CBCT images from adult Japanese patients (system training, n = 152; evaluation, n = 33) were used in this study. Cranial and mandibular images were generated via surface rendering of CBCT images. An experienced orthodontist manually recognised 19 and 45 3D landmarks for the cranium and mandible, respectively, and used them as the gold standard after they were checked by another experienced orthodontist. An AI system developed using PointNet ++ was trained to output landmark coordinates based on surface data and normal vectors. Mesh fitting (homologous modelling) was then conducted using the AI-identified landmarks. The errors in mesh fitting were evaluated.
resultsThe mean errors for wire mesh fittings with AI-identified landmarks for the maxilla and mandible were 0.80 ± 0.57 mm and 1.45 ± 0.34 mm, respectively. DISCUSSION: An AI-based landmark identification system and mesh fittings that demonstrate clinically acceptable accuracy were presented. This system can be applied in clinical settings to quantify and visualise craniofacial structures in three dimensions.
conclusionThe automated 3D surface cephalometry system utilising mesh fitting based on AI-identified landmarks showed clinically acceptable accuracy. This allows orthodontists to compare a patient's craniofacial surface with normative data, without the need for manual landmark identification.
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.