脑后前位造影中标记定位的随机错误。

A E Athanasiou, R Miethke, A J Van Der Meij
{"title":"脑后前位造影中标记定位的随机错误。","authors":"A E Athanasiou,&nbsp;R Miethke,&nbsp;A J Van Der Meij","doi":"10.1093/ortho/26.4.273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of the present study was to evaluate the random error in localization of the most common landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms (PAC). The study took place at the Department of Orthodontics of Aarhus University during the period 1993-1995. The material consisted of 30 standardized PAC taken in natural head position. Five examiners had to identify 34 landmarks on each cephalogram. Subsequently, all examiners had to identify again the same 34 landmarks on one randomly selected cephalogram five times with a time interval of at least 24 hours. All landmarks were digitized, related to an X-Y co-ordinate system, and an arithmetical mean was calculated. The accuracy of digitizing was evaluated by digitizing one randomly selected cephalogram 10 times. The main findings of this study are: (1) The digitizing error is negligible compared to the errors introduced by landmark identification. (2) Each landmark has its own characteristic pattern of variance, which is very similar on both sides. (3) Significant differences in accuracy exist between the various postero-anterior landmarks. The six most accurate landmarks are mastoid left (l) and right (r), latero-orbitale (l) and (r), and antegonion (l) and (r). The six least accurate landmarks are coronoid (l) and (r), condylar (l) and (r), and mandibular foramen (l) and (r). (4) A significant difference in the accuracy of landmark identification between the five examiners was only seen for seven of the 34 landmarks. (5) No evidence was found that one examiner was consistently better/worse than the others. (6) No improvement in the accuracy was found after repeated identification, thus there seems to be no short-term 'learning process'. Refereed Paper</p>","PeriodicalId":75621,"journal":{"name":"British journal of orthodontics","volume":"26 4","pages":"273-84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/ortho/26.4.273","citationCount":"33","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Random errors in localization of landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms.\",\"authors\":\"A E Athanasiou,&nbsp;R Miethke,&nbsp;A J Van Der Meij\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ortho/26.4.273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of the present study was to evaluate the random error in localization of the most common landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms (PAC). The study took place at the Department of Orthodontics of Aarhus University during the period 1993-1995. The material consisted of 30 standardized PAC taken in natural head position. Five examiners had to identify 34 landmarks on each cephalogram. Subsequently, all examiners had to identify again the same 34 landmarks on one randomly selected cephalogram five times with a time interval of at least 24 hours. All landmarks were digitized, related to an X-Y co-ordinate system, and an arithmetical mean was calculated. The accuracy of digitizing was evaluated by digitizing one randomly selected cephalogram 10 times. The main findings of this study are: (1) The digitizing error is negligible compared to the errors introduced by landmark identification. (2) Each landmark has its own characteristic pattern of variance, which is very similar on both sides. (3) Significant differences in accuracy exist between the various postero-anterior landmarks. The six most accurate landmarks are mastoid left (l) and right (r), latero-orbitale (l) and (r), and antegonion (l) and (r). The six least accurate landmarks are coronoid (l) and (r), condylar (l) and (r), and mandibular foramen (l) and (r). (4) A significant difference in the accuracy of landmark identification between the five examiners was only seen for seven of the 34 landmarks. (5) No evidence was found that one examiner was consistently better/worse than the others. (6) No improvement in the accuracy was found after repeated identification, thus there seems to be no short-term 'learning process'. Refereed Paper</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British journal of orthodontics\",\"volume\":\"26 4\",\"pages\":\"273-84\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/ortho/26.4.273\",\"citationCount\":\"33\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British journal of orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/26.4.273\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/26.4.273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 33

摘要

本研究的目的是评估在最常见的标志定位的随机误差后,前脑电图(PAC)。这项研究是1993-1995年期间在奥胡斯大学正畸系进行的。该材料由30个标准的PAC组成,采用自然头部位置。五名审查员必须在每张脑电图上识别34个地标。随后,所有审查员必须在随机选择的一张脑电图上再次识别相同的34个地标5次,间隔时间至少为24小时。所有的地标都被数字化,与X-Y坐标系相关,并计算算术平均值。通过对随机选取的一张脑电图进行10次数字化,评价数字化的准确性。本研究的主要发现有:(1)与地标识别带来的误差相比,数字化误差可以忽略不计。(2)每一个地标都有自己的特征变异模式,两侧的变异模式非常相似。(3)不同的后前标志在准确性上存在显著差异。六个最准确的标志是乳突左(l)和右(r),眶后(l)和(r),以及对角(l)和(r)。六个最不准确的标志是冠状(l)和(r),髁突(l)和(r),下颌孔(l)和(r)。(4)在34个标志中,五个检查者之间的标志识别准确性有显著差异。没有证据表明一位考官总是比其他考官好/差。(6)重复识别后,准确率没有提高,似乎不存在短期的“学习过程”。执法纸
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Random errors in localization of landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the random error in localization of the most common landmarks in postero-anterior cephalograms (PAC). The study took place at the Department of Orthodontics of Aarhus University during the period 1993-1995. The material consisted of 30 standardized PAC taken in natural head position. Five examiners had to identify 34 landmarks on each cephalogram. Subsequently, all examiners had to identify again the same 34 landmarks on one randomly selected cephalogram five times with a time interval of at least 24 hours. All landmarks were digitized, related to an X-Y co-ordinate system, and an arithmetical mean was calculated. The accuracy of digitizing was evaluated by digitizing one randomly selected cephalogram 10 times. The main findings of this study are: (1) The digitizing error is negligible compared to the errors introduced by landmark identification. (2) Each landmark has its own characteristic pattern of variance, which is very similar on both sides. (3) Significant differences in accuracy exist between the various postero-anterior landmarks. The six most accurate landmarks are mastoid left (l) and right (r), latero-orbitale (l) and (r), and antegonion (l) and (r). The six least accurate landmarks are coronoid (l) and (r), condylar (l) and (r), and mandibular foramen (l) and (r). (4) A significant difference in the accuracy of landmark identification between the five examiners was only seen for seven of the 34 landmarks. (5) No evidence was found that one examiner was consistently better/worse than the others. (6) No improvement in the accuracy was found after repeated identification, thus there seems to be no short-term 'learning process'. Refereed Paper

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
At a crossroads: health and vulnerability in the era of AIDS Re: Orthologic 'A' company award for 1997. Reviews and abstracts Re: Forestadent travel award. The bedfordshire PDS orthodontic pilot.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1