Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Narrative review compares artificial intelligence and manual methods in cephalometric tracing, suggesting improvements for orthodontic education.
This narrative review describes the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in cephalometric tracing, comparing its accuracy, efficiency, and limitations to manual methods. AI significantly reduces analysis time, especially for novice tracers, and demonstrates high accuracy overall. However, the literature shows that errors persist, reflecting algorithmic and dataset biases. While AI can enhance clinical efficiency, presently it should complement, not replace, orthodontic expertise. Future development and improvements in the use of AI in orthodontics are required. Incorporating AI awareness into orthodontic training programmes is recommended for preparing clinicians for evolving digital workflows. CPD/Clinical Relevance: It is important for clinicians to be aware of the evolving role of artificial intelligence in orthodontics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Caratela et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: