|
|
||||||||
British Journal of Orthodontics, Vol 11, 44-48, Copyright © 1984 by British Orthodontic Society
ARTICLES |
AM Cohen
Sources of cephalometric error are considered, and different techniques of measurement are discussed. The use of the digitizer on tracings, untraced films and modified tracings is evaluated with regard to reproducibility of cephalometric angles and co-ordinates.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Sayinsu, F. Isik, G. Trakyali, and T. Arun An evaluation of the errors in cephalometric measurements on scanned cephalometric images and conventional tracings Eur J Orthod, February 1, 2007; 29(1): 105 - 108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y-J Chen, S-K Chen, H-W Huang, C-C Yao, and H-F Chang Reliability of landmark identification in cephalometric radiography acquired by a storage phosphor imaging system Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., September 1, 2004; 33(5): 301 - 306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Yagi, T. Morimoto, O. Hidaka, K. Iwata, Y. Masuda, M. Kobayashi, and K. Takada Adjustment of the Occlusal Vertical Dimension in the Bite-raised Guinea Pig J. Dent. Res., February 1, 2003; 82(2): 127 - 130. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. J. Turner and S. Weerakone An Evaluation of the Reproducibility of Landmark Identification Using Scanned Cephalometric Images J. Orthod., September 1, 2001; 28(3): 221 - 230. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |