ArticleCureus2026
Agreement of Gonial Angle Measurements Between Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT)-Reconstructed Panoramic Radiographs and Conventional Panoramic Radiographs: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The gonial angle is an important cephalometric parameter used to assess mandibular morphology and vertical facial growth. Conventional lateral cephalograms (LCs) and orthopantomograms (OPGs) are routinely used for its evaluation; however, image distortion and superimposition may affect measurement accuracy. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) enables 3D visualization and can generate reconstructed 2D cephalometric and panoramic images that may provide comparable measurements without requiring additional radiographic exposure when a CBCT scan is already available. Objective To evaluate the agreement between gonial angle measurements obtained from conventional LCs and OPGs and those derived from CBCT-reconstructed cephalograms and panoramic images in normodivergent individuals. Methods This cross-sectional study included 24 normodivergent orthodontic patients. Gonial angles were measured on conventional LCs, conventional OPGs, CBCT-reconstructed cephalograms, and CBCT-generated panoramic images using standardized digital imaging software. Mean measurements were compared using paired statistical analysis. Agreement between the imaging modalities was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, while intra- and inter-examiner reliability were evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and weighted kappa statistics. Results No statistically significant differences were observed between gonial angle measurements obtained from conventional radiographs and those obtained from CBCT-reconstructed images (p > 0.05). Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated minimal systematic bias and acceptable limits of agreement between the imaging modalities. Both conventional and CBCT-derived measurements exhibited excellent intra- and inter-examiner reliability, supporting the reproducibility of the measurement techniques. Conclusions CBCT-reconstructed cephalograms and panoramic images demonstrated excellent agreement with conventional LCs and OPGs for gonial angle assessment in normodivergent individuals. When a CBCT scan has already been acquired for clinical indications, reconstructed images may provide reliable gonial angle measurements without the need for additional conventional radiographs, thereby reducing unnecessary radiation exposure.
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.