ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
Anterior vertical relationship: validation of an artificial intelligence model vs. digitally assisted human observers.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to develop and validate an artificial intelligence (AI) system for measuring and categorizing anterior vertical relationships, and to evaluate its performance against manual assessments by a human observer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study was structured in three phases: model training, validation, and final testing. A dataset of 750 intraoral frontal photographs from patients treated at the University of … was used for training and validation, while 300 additional intraoral images and scans formed the testing set. A YOLOv8-segmentation (YOLOv8-seg) model was developed to perform automated tooth segmentation, followed by measurement and classification of anterior vertical relationships according to the Index of Complexity, Outcome, and Need (ICON). Manual measurements on intraoral scans were obtained using OrthoCAD software. Agreement between AI and human classifications was assessed with the Kappa statistic, while chi-square tested goodness-of-fit. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, accuracy, and area under the curve (AUC).
resultsThe AI system achieved 92% accuracy with excellent agreement to manual assessments (Kappa = 0.89, p < 0.0001). Discrepancies were minimal at 3%. For deep bite detection, sensitivity was 95.9%, specificity 100%, and accuracy 97.2% (AUC = 0.979). For open bite detection, sensitivity reached 96.3%, specificity 100%, and accuracy 98.5% (AUC = 0.98).
conclusionThe AI model demonstrated high accuracy and excellent agreement with manual measurements, confirming its potential as a reliable and objective tool for automated quantification of anterior vertical relationships in orthodontic diagnosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41817634What 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.