British Journal of Orthodontics, Vol 15, 105-110, Copyright © 1988 by British Orthodontic Society

ARTICLES

Reproducibility of cephalometric measurements

PJ Sandler
Institute of Dental Surgery, London.

This cephalometric study was undertaken to compare and contrast the errors involved in taking linear and angular measurements using three different methods; hand instruments on tracings, digitization of tracings, and direct digitization of the radiographs. Of the three methods direct digitization of the radiographs proved to be the most reproducible particularly with angular measurements, although statistically significant differences were rarely found. Tracings were advantageous only with linear measurements involving constructed points such as Gonion and Articulare. Traditional methods of measurement using a ruler and protractor compared well with computer based methods involving the digitizer.

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]

				A. M. Hamdan and W. P. Rock Cephalometric Norms in an Arabic Population J. Orthod., December 1, 2001; 28(4): 297 - 300. [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]