• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

移动设备上的数字化头影测量追踪应用与手动追踪的比较评估

Comparative Evaluation of Digital Cephalometric Tracing Applications on Mobile Devices and Manual Tracing.

机构信息

Orthodontists, United International Dental Complex,, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

General Practitioner, Denal Department, Tadawi Medical Complex, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

出版信息

Med Sci Monit. 2024 Jun 23;30:e944628. doi: 10.12659/MSM.944628.

DOI:10.12659/MSM.944628
PMID:38909276
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11305110/
Abstract

BACKGROUND Cephalometric radiography evaluates facial skeleton development and aids in diagnosis and treatment phases (pre and post) in orthodontics. This study aimed to compare digital cephalometric tracing using a smartphone application (App), a tablet-based platform, and manual tracing in 30 orthodontic patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS Thirty orthodontic pretreatment, criteria based, lateral cephalometric radiographs were analyzed/grouped for Steiner analysis parameters (5 skeletal, 3 dentals, 1 soft tissue) by 3 tracing methods [manual - group (Gp M), smartphone (Android - OS9) - Gp S, tablet (Apple - IOS13) - Gp T) after mandatory standardization/calibration. Measurements include 5 angular (SNA, SNB, ANB, SNMPA, SNOP), 3 linear U1NA, L1NB, U1L1, and 1 soft tissue (S line) (millimeters and degrees). Inter-examiner rating was determined using Dahlberg's test. After normality distribution testing (Shapiro-Wilk), data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for group differences. Homogeneity of variance was verified using the Levene test. Differences were determined on probability value of (p≤0.05). RESULTS The results showed that Steiner's analysis parameters were similar in all groups with homogenous variances. Highest differences in mean values were found for L1NB, U1L1, and S line measurement, with higher values being observed in Gp S tracings. However, these differences were not statistically significant (p≤0.05). All parameters, irrespective of being measured in either degrees or millimeters, had means comparable to each other. CONCLUSIONS Smartphone and tablet-based applications produced tracings that were comparable and reliable when compared to conventional manual tracings. Standardization of images, processing, printing, and calibration of devices is important to achieve good results.

摘要

背景

头颅侧位片评估面颅骨的发育情况,并有助于正畸的诊断和治疗阶段(治疗前和治疗后)。本研究旨在比较使用智能手机应用程序(App)、基于平板电脑的平台和手动描记对 30 名正畸患者的数字化头颅侧位片进行描记。

材料与方法

对 30 名正畸治疗前、基于标准的侧位头颅 X 光片进行分析/分组,进行 Steiner 分析参数(5 个骨骼、3 个牙齿、1 个软组织),使用 3 种描记方法[手动描记组(Gp M)、智能手机(Android-OS9)-Gp S、平板电脑(Apple-IOS13)-Gp T],在进行强制性标准化/校准后进行。测量包括 5 个角度(SNA、SNB、ANB、SNMPA、SNOP)、3 个线性 U1NA、L1NB、U1L1 和 1 个软组织(S 线)(毫米和度)。使用 Dahberg 检验进行组间评估者评分。在进行正态分布检验(Shapiro-Wilk)后,使用单向方差分析(ANOVA)对组间差异进行分析。使用 Levene 检验验证方差的同质性。差异概率值为(p≤0.05)。

结果

结果表明,所有组的 Steiner 分析参数均相似,具有同质方差。L1NB、U1L1 和 S 线测量的平均值差异最大,Gp S 描记的数值较高。然而,这些差异没有统计学意义(p≤0.05)。所有参数,无论是以度还是毫米为单位进行测量,其平均值均相互可比。

结论

与传统手动描记相比,基于智能手机和基于平板电脑的应用程序生成的描记结果相似且可靠。图像标准化、处理、打印和设备校准对于获得良好的结果非常重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7fed/11305110/83f61e855844/medscimonit-30-e944628-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7fed/11305110/ce4b98a681d8/medscimonit-30-e944628-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7fed/11305110/83f61e855844/medscimonit-30-e944628-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7fed/11305110/ce4b98a681d8/medscimonit-30-e944628-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7fed/11305110/83f61e855844/medscimonit-30-e944628-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparative Evaluation of Digital Cephalometric Tracing Applications on Mobile Devices and Manual Tracing.移动设备上的数字化头影测量追踪应用与手动追踪的比较评估
Med Sci Monit. 2024 Jun 23;30:e944628. doi: 10.12659/MSM.944628.
2
Manual tracing versus smartphone application (app) tracing: a comparative study.手动追踪与智能手机应用程序(app)追踪:一项对比研究。
Acta Odontol Scand. 2017 Nov;75(8):588-594. doi: 10.1080/00016357.2017.1364420. Epub 2017 Aug 9.
3
Evaluation of accuracy and reliability of OneCeph digital cephalometric analysis in comparison with manual cephalometric analysis-a cross-sectional study.与手工头影测量分析相比,OneCeph数字化头影测量分析的准确性和可靠性评估——一项横断面研究。
BDJ Open. 2021 Jun 17;7(1):22. doi: 10.1038/s41405-021-00077-2.
4
The reliability and reproducibility of an Android cephalometric smartphone application in comparison with the conventional method.一款安卓头颅侧位测量智能手机应用程序与传统方法相比的可靠性和可重复性。
Angle Orthod. 2021 Mar 1;91(2):236-242. doi: 10.2319/042320-345.1.
5
Evaluation of fully automated cephalometric measurements obtained from web-based artificial intelligence driven platform.基于网络的人工智能驱动平台获取的全自动头影测量评估。
BMC Oral Health. 2022 Apr 19;22(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s12903-022-02170-w.
6
The accuracy of cephalometric tracing superimposition.头影测量描记重叠法的准确性。
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2006 Feb;64(2):194-202. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2005.10.028.
7
A comparative evaluation of concordance and speed between smartphone app-based and artificial intelligence web-based cephalometric tracing software with the manual tracing method: A cross-sectional study.基于智能手机应用程序和基于人工智能的网络头颅测量追踪软件与手工追踪方法之间的一致性和速度的比较评估:一项横断面研究。
J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Jan 1;16(1):e11-e17. doi: 10.4317/jced.60899. eCollection 2024 Jan.
8
Web-based Fully Automated Cephalometric Analysis: Comparisons between App-aided, Computerized, and Manual Tracings.基于网络的全自动头影测量分析:应用程序辅助、计算机化和手工描记之间的比较。
Turk J Orthod. 2020 Aug 11;33(3):142-149. doi: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.20062. eCollection 2020 Sep.
9
Reproducibility of measurements in tablet-assisted, PC-aided, and manual cephalometric analysis.片剂辅助、计算机辅助和手工头影测量分析中测量结果的可重复性。
Angle Orthod. 2014 May;84(3):437-42. doi: 10.2319/061513-451.1. Epub 2013 Oct 25.
10
Evaluation and comparison of smartphone application tracing, web based artificial intelligence tracing and conventional hand tracing methods.智能手机应用追踪、基于网络的人工智能追踪与传统人工追踪方法的评估与比较。
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Nov;123(6):e906-e915. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.07.017. Epub 2022 Jul 26.

引用本文的文献

1
Predictability of a Mandibular Corpus Length Multivariate Model Integrating Björk-Jarabak Measurements and the Cephalometric Norm.整合比约克-雅拉巴克测量值和头影测量标准的下颌骨体长多变量模型的可预测性
Cureus. 2025 Jul 13;17(7):e87864. doi: 10.7759/cureus.87864. eCollection 2025 Jul.

本文引用的文献

1
A comparative evaluation of concordance and speed between smartphone app-based and artificial intelligence web-based cephalometric tracing software with the manual tracing method: A cross-sectional study.基于智能手机应用程序和基于人工智能的网络头颅测量追踪软件与手工追踪方法之间的一致性和速度的比较评估:一项横断面研究。
J Clin Exp Dent. 2024 Jan 1;16(1):e11-e17. doi: 10.4317/jced.60899. eCollection 2024 Jan.
2
Evaluation and comparison of smartphone application tracing, web based artificial intelligence tracing and conventional hand tracing methods.智能手机应用追踪、基于网络的人工智能追踪与传统人工追踪方法的评估与比较。
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Nov;123(6):e906-e915. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.07.017. Epub 2022 Jul 26.
3
Reliability of mobile application-based cephalometric analysis for chair side evaluation of orthodontic patient in clinical practice.基于移动应用程序的头影测量分析在临床实践中用于正畸患者椅旁评估的可靠性。
J Orthod Sci. 2021 Aug 4;10:16. doi: 10.4103/jos.JOS_28_20. eCollection 2021.
4
Evaluation of accuracy and reliability of OneCeph digital cephalometric analysis in comparison with manual cephalometric analysis-a cross-sectional study.与手工头影测量分析相比,OneCeph数字化头影测量分析的准确性和可靠性评估——一项横断面研究。
BDJ Open. 2021 Jun 17;7(1):22. doi: 10.1038/s41405-021-00077-2.
5
Smartphone applications used in orthodontics: A scoping review of scholarly literature.正畸学中使用的智能手机应用程序:学术文献的范围综述。
J World Fed Orthod. 2020 Oct;9(3S):S67-S73. doi: 10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.08.007. Epub 2020 Sep 30.
6
Comparative Evaluation of CephNinja for Android and NemoCeph for Computer for Cephalometric Analysis: A Study to Evaluate the Diagnostic Performance of CephNinja for Cephalometric Analysis.用于头影测量分析的安卓版CephNinja与电脑版NemoCeph的比较评估:一项评估CephNinja用于头影测量分析诊断性能的研究。
J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2020 Jun 15;10(3):286-291. doi: 10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_4_20. eCollection 2020 May-Jun.
7
Can mobile health apps replace GPs? A scoping review of comparisons between mobile apps and GP tasks.移动医疗应用程序能否替代全科医生?对移动应用程序与全科医生任务进行比较的范围综述。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2020 Jan 6;20(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12911-019-1016-4.
8
Artificial intelligence in orthodontics : Evaluation of a fully automated cephalometric analysis using a customized convolutional neural network.正畸学中的人工智能:使用定制卷积神经网络对全自动头影测量分析的评估
J Orofac Orthop. 2020 Jan;81(1):52-68. doi: 10.1007/s00056-019-00203-8. Epub 2019 Dec 18.
9
Distortion and magnification of four digital cephalometric units.四种数字化头影测量设备的畸变与放大率
Niger J Clin Pract. 2019 Dec;22(12):1644-1653. doi: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_184_19.
10
Concurrent validity and reliability of cephalometric analysis using smartphone apps and computer software.使用智能手机应用程序和计算机软件进行头影测量分析的同时效度和可靠性。
Angle Orthod. 2019 Nov;89(6):889-896. doi: 10.2319/021919-124.1. Epub 2019 Jul 8.