ArticleBMC oral health2025
An open-source AI tool for predicting cephalometric measurements from clinical data and photographic images.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionTraditional orthodontic diagnostics rely significantly on lateral cephalometric radiographs, posing health risks due to ionising radiation, particularly in paediatric patients. Artificial intelligence (AI) represents a promising alternative by enabling predictions of cephalometric parameters from non-radiographic clinical data. This study evaluates the accuracy and clinical utility of CEPHCLINIC, an open-source AI software designed to predict conventional cephalometric measurements using clinical photographs and intraoral 3D scans, thus adhering to radiation protection principles. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe dataset comprised 1255 subjects from the American Association of Orthodontists Foundation (AAOF) craniofacial collection, encompassing demographic and clinical variables (age, gender, overbite, overjet, facial dimensions). This dataset was randomly divided into training (80%, n = 1004) and validation (20%, n = 251) subsets. Additionally, an independent external test set of 51 untreated orthodontic cases was employed for rigorous evaluation. Input variables for model training included clinical parameters derived from photographs (WebCeph software) and intraoral scans (iTero scanner, MeshMixer software). Supervised predictive regression models, including ExtraTreesRegressor, CatBoostRegressor, and Support Vector Regression, were optimised through GridSearchCV and validated using repeated random subsampling. Predictive accuracy was assessed statistically using Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Spearman correlation coefficients, R-squared values, and paired t-tests.
resultsThe ExtraTreesRegressor demonstrated superior performance across multiple cephalometric parameters, achieving notably low RMSE values in the independent test set for ANB (2.772°) and NP2PA (2.317 mm). However, parameters like COPAD exhibited higher prediction errors (RMSE 12.121 mm). Spearman correlation analysis indicated strong prediction consistency for COPOD (0.850), moderate for U1SNA (0.548), and poor predictability for NP2PO (-0.052). Despite statistically significant biases observed in predictions for some parameters (paired t-test, p < 0.05), overall predictive accuracy was clinically acceptable, emphasising parameters such as COPOD, COPAD, ANB, and U1SNA as particularly reliable.
conclusionsThe CEPHCLINIC software reliably predicts key cephalometric measurements from non-radiographic clinical data, significantly reducing radiation exposure risks. Despite promising performance, model refinement, dataset expansion with broader demographic representation, and integration with digital orthodontic technologies are essential for enhancing precision, clinical reliability, and global applicability.
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.