Evaluation and comparison of smartphone application tracing, web based artificial intelligence tracing and conventional hand tracing methods

J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2022 Nov;123(6):e906-e915. doi: 10.1016/j.jormas.2022.07.017. Epub 2022 Jul 26.

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the reliability of three different cephalometric assessment methods: Smartphone Application Tracing Method CephNinja (SATM), Web Based Artificial Intelligence (AI) Driven Tracing Method WebCeph (WATM) and Conventional Hand Tracing Method (CHTM).

Methods: 110 lateral cephalometric radiographs were enrolled in the study and 4 linear and 7 angular parameters were traced and measured by one examiner using CephNinja, WebCeph and conventional hand tracing methods. Independent-samples Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro Wilks tests were used to compare the mean values of intra-examiner differences. Both intra-method and inter-method correlations were evaluated.

Results: There were statistically significant differences between the methods in terms of SNA (p:0.003; p < 0.05); SNB measurements (p:0.001; p < 0.05); SN-MP angle (p:0.001; p < 0.05); U1-SN angle (p:0.001; p < 0.05); L1-NB(mm) (p:0.007; p < 0.05) and E Line-Upper Lip(mm) measurements (p:0.013; p < 0.05). All intra-method correlation coefficients are 80% and above. In terms of inter-method coefficients the lowest coefficient of agreement is 0.170 and it is the coefficient of agreement between CHTM and SATM for measurement of U1-NA. The highest coefficient of agreement is 0.884 which is between WBTM and SATM for SNB measurement.

Conclusions: The null hypothesis was rejected. There were statistically and clinically significant differences in various measurements among groups.

Keywords: CephNinja; Cephalometric analysis; Conventional hand tracing; Reliability; WebCeph.

MeSH terms

  • Artificial Intelligence*
  • Humans
  • Image Processing, Computer-Assisted / methods
  • Internet
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Smartphone*