ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2026
Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Cephalometric Analysis: A Comparative Study Between WebCeph and NemoCeph.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Cephalometric Analysis: A Comparative Study Between WebCeph and NemoCeph.International journal of dentistry · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into orthodontics has facilitated automated cephalometric assessments, offering greater efficiency and minimizing human-related inaccuracies. Nevertheless, the precision of AI-driven systems, when compared with conventional digital analysis software, requires thorough validation. To evaluate the accuracy and consistency of AI-assisted cephalometric analysis using WebCeph in relation to manual tracings performed using NemoCeph, which is regarded as the reference standard. Cephalometric radiographs were obtained from 50 adult patients. Linear and angular parameters were measured using NemoCeph and WebCeph, and statistical comparisons were performed. Data normality was verified using the Shapiro-Wilk test, while paired
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.