Alice Cutrera, E. Barbato, F. Maiorana, D. Giordano, R. Leonardi
{"title":"使用两种输入设备:鼠标驱动的光标和笔在头测量分析中标记过程的再现性和速度。","authors":"Alice Cutrera, E. Barbato, F. Maiorana, D. Giordano, R. Leonardi","doi":"10.11138/ads/2015.6.2.047","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AIMS\nTo define if the new portable appliances, like smartphone, iPad, small laptop and tablet can be used in cephalometric tracing without dropping out the validity of any measurement.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe investigated and compared the reproducibility and the speed of landmarks identification process on lateral X-rays in two input devices: a mouse-driven cursor and a pen used as input means in mobile devices. One expert located 22 landmarks on 15 lateral X-rays in a repeated measure design two times, at time T1 and T2, after at least one month. The Intraclass Correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the reproducibility for each landmark tracing and the agreement between the value derived from both input devices. Also, the mean errors in measurements, the standard deviation and the Friedman Test significans (P < 0.05) between both input were statistically evaluated.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAll landmarks had a high agreement and the Friedman Test indicated statistically significant differences (P<0.05) for the identification of Na, Po, Pt, PNS, Ba, Pg, Gn, UIE, UIA, APOcc and PPOcc landmarks.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nEven if the mouse input give higher agreement for landmark tracing the differences are really minimal and they can be ignored in private practice. We suggest the adequacy of pen input in clinical setting.","PeriodicalId":78041,"journal":{"name":"Annali di stomatologia","volume":"6 2 1","pages":"47-52"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reproducibility and speed of landmarking process in cephalometric analysis using two input devices: mouse-driven cursor versus pen.\",\"authors\":\"Alice Cutrera, E. Barbato, F. Maiorana, D. Giordano, R. Leonardi\",\"doi\":\"10.11138/ads/2015.6.2.047\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AIMS\\nTo define if the new portable appliances, like smartphone, iPad, small laptop and tablet can be used in cephalometric tracing without dropping out the validity of any measurement.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nWe investigated and compared the reproducibility and the speed of landmarks identification process on lateral X-rays in two input devices: a mouse-driven cursor and a pen used as input means in mobile devices. One expert located 22 landmarks on 15 lateral X-rays in a repeated measure design two times, at time T1 and T2, after at least one month. The Intraclass Correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the reproducibility for each landmark tracing and the agreement between the value derived from both input devices. Also, the mean errors in measurements, the standard deviation and the Friedman Test significans (P < 0.05) between both input were statistically evaluated.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nAll landmarks had a high agreement and the Friedman Test indicated statistically significant differences (P<0.05) for the identification of Na, Po, Pt, PNS, Ba, Pg, Gn, UIE, UIA, APOcc and PPOcc landmarks.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSIONS\\nEven if the mouse input give higher agreement for landmark tracing the differences are really minimal and they can be ignored in private practice. We suggest the adequacy of pen input in clinical setting.\",\"PeriodicalId\":78041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annali di stomatologia\",\"volume\":\"6 2 1\",\"pages\":\"47-52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annali di stomatologia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11138/ads/2015.6.2.047\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annali di stomatologia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11138/ads/2015.6.2.047","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reproducibility and speed of landmarking process in cephalometric analysis using two input devices: mouse-driven cursor versus pen.
AIMS
To define if the new portable appliances, like smartphone, iPad, small laptop and tablet can be used in cephalometric tracing without dropping out the validity of any measurement.
METHODS
We investigated and compared the reproducibility and the speed of landmarks identification process on lateral X-rays in two input devices: a mouse-driven cursor and a pen used as input means in mobile devices. One expert located 22 landmarks on 15 lateral X-rays in a repeated measure design two times, at time T1 and T2, after at least one month. The Intraclass Correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the reproducibility for each landmark tracing and the agreement between the value derived from both input devices. Also, the mean errors in measurements, the standard deviation and the Friedman Test significans (P < 0.05) between both input were statistically evaluated.
RESULTS
All landmarks had a high agreement and the Friedman Test indicated statistically significant differences (P<0.05) for the identification of Na, Po, Pt, PNS, Ba, Pg, Gn, UIE, UIA, APOcc and PPOcc landmarks.
CONCLUSIONS
Even if the mouse input give higher agreement for landmark tracing the differences are really minimal and they can be ignored in private practice. We suggest the adequacy of pen input in clinical setting.