Retrospective trial evaluates AI's accuracy in measuring overjet and overbite in orthodontic patients, suggesting its usefulness and limitations.
This study evaluated the reliability of artificial intelligence (AI)-based cephalometric measurements of overjet (OJ) and overbite (OB) and their agreement with manual assessment and investigated factors that may influence measurement outcomes. This retrospective cross-sectional study included 200 orthodontic patients (125 females, 75 males; mean age 20.12 years) selected from 440 records. Manual OJ and OB measurements were obtained twice from dental models using digital calipers and served as the reference standard. AI-based measurements were generated from lateral cephalometric radiographs using WebCeph™. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), while agreement between methods was evaluated using paired t-tests and Bland–Altman analysis. AI-based measurements showed significantly higher OJ and slightly lower OB values than manual measurements, with mean differences of 0.89 mm for OJ and −0.44 mm for OB (p < 0.05). Intra- and inter-examiner reliability were excellent (ICCs > 0.90). Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated that most measurement differences were within the 95% limits of agreement despite a small systematic bias. These findings suggest that AI-assisted cephalometric analysis provides a rapid and reliable approach for routine orthodontic assessment; however, individual discrepancies may be clinically relevant when high measurement precision is required. Therefore, AI should be considered a useful adjunct to conventional assessment, whereas manual measurements remain the reference standard when maximum measurement accuracy is essential.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ganjali et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: