Abstract
The traditional method of analysing cephalograms - conventional cephalometric analysis (CCA) - involves the calculation of linear distance measurements, angular measurements, area measurements, and ratios. Because shape information cannot be determined from these 'size-based' measurements, an increasing number of studies employ geometric morphometric tools in the cephalometric analysis of craniofacial morphology. Most of the discussions surrounding the appropriateness of CCA, Procrustes superimposition, Euclidean distance matrix analysis (EDMA), thin-plate spline analysis (TPS), finite element morphometry (FEM), elliptical Fourier functions (EFF), and medial axis analysis (MAA) have centred upon mathematical and statistical arguments. Surprisingly, little information is available to assist the orthodontist in the clinical relevance of each technique. This article evaluates the advantages and limitations of the above methods currently used to analyse the craniofacial morphology on cephalograms and investigates their clinical relevance and possible applications.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 231-242 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | European Journal of Orthodontics |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2003 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Size and shape measurement in contemporary cephalometrics. / McIntyre, Grant T.; Mossey, Peter A.
In: European Journal of Orthodontics, Vol. 25, No. 3, 01.06.2003, p. 231-242.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Size and shape measurement in contemporary cephalometrics
AU - McIntyre, Grant T.
AU - Mossey, Peter A.
PY - 2003/6/1
Y1 - 2003/6/1
N2 - The traditional method of analysing cephalograms - conventional cephalometric analysis (CCA) - involves the calculation of linear distance measurements, angular measurements, area measurements, and ratios. Because shape information cannot be determined from these 'size-based' measurements, an increasing number of studies employ geometric morphometric tools in the cephalometric analysis of craniofacial morphology. Most of the discussions surrounding the appropriateness of CCA, Procrustes superimposition, Euclidean distance matrix analysis (EDMA), thin-plate spline analysis (TPS), finite element morphometry (FEM), elliptical Fourier functions (EFF), and medial axis analysis (MAA) have centred upon mathematical and statistical arguments. Surprisingly, little information is available to assist the orthodontist in the clinical relevance of each technique. This article evaluates the advantages and limitations of the above methods currently used to analyse the craniofacial morphology on cephalograms and investigates their clinical relevance and possible applications.
AB - The traditional method of analysing cephalograms - conventional cephalometric analysis (CCA) - involves the calculation of linear distance measurements, angular measurements, area measurements, and ratios. Because shape information cannot be determined from these 'size-based' measurements, an increasing number of studies employ geometric morphometric tools in the cephalometric analysis of craniofacial morphology. Most of the discussions surrounding the appropriateness of CCA, Procrustes superimposition, Euclidean distance matrix analysis (EDMA), thin-plate spline analysis (TPS), finite element morphometry (FEM), elliptical Fourier functions (EFF), and medial axis analysis (MAA) have centred upon mathematical and statistical arguments. Surprisingly, little information is available to assist the orthodontist in the clinical relevance of each technique. This article evaluates the advantages and limitations of the above methods currently used to analyse the craniofacial morphology on cephalograms and investigates their clinical relevance and possible applications.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141498996&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/ejo/25.3.231
DO - 10.1093/ejo/25.3.231
M3 - Review article
C2 - 12831212
AN - SCOPUS:0141498996
VL - 25
SP - 231
EP - 242
JO - European Journal of Orthodontics
JF - European Journal of Orthodontics
SN - 0141-5387
IS - 3
ER -