Reproducibility, reliability and validity of measurements obtained from Cecile3 digital models

Brazilian Oral Research

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 288-295

  Watanabe Kanno, Gustavo Adolfo ^a   Abrão, Jorge ^a   Miasiro Jr , Hiroshi ^a   Sánchez Ayala, Alfonso ^b   Lagravère, Manuel O ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Dental models; Orthodontics; Reproducibility of results

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CHILD; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DENTAL CARE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; ODONTOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DENTAL MODELS; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; ODONTOMETRY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 72449197490     PISSN: 18068324     EISSN: 18073107     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/S1806-83242009000300011     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Oliveira DD, Ruellas ACO, Drummond MEL, Pantuzo MCG, Lanna ÂMQ. Confiabilidade do uso de modelos digitais tridimensionais como exame auxiliar ao diagnóstico ortodôntico: um estudo piloto. Rev Dent Press Ortodon Ortop Facial. 2007;12(1):84-93.
2. Quimby ML, Vig KWL, Rashid RG, Firestone AR. The accuracy and reliability of measurements made on computer-based digital models. Angle Orthod. 2004;74(3):298-303.
3. Martensson B, Ryden H. The holodent system, a new technique for measurement and storage of dental casts. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;102(2):113-9.
4. Schirmer UR, Wilshire WA. Manual and computer aided space analysis: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;112(6):676-80.
5. Champagne M. Reliability of measurements from photocopies of study models. J Clin Orthod. 1992;26(10):648-50.
6. Rheude B, Sadowsky L, Ferriera A, Jacobson A. An evaluation of the use of digital study models in Orthodontic Diagnosis and Treatment Planning. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(3):300-4.
7. Tomassetti JJ, Taloumis LJ, Denny JM, Fischer JR. A comparison of 3 computerized Bolton tooth-size analyses with a commonly used method. Angle Orthod. 2001;71(5):351-7.
8. Garino F, Garino GB. Comparison of dental arch measurements between stone and digital casts. World J Orthod. 2002;3(3):250-4.
9. Zilberman O, Huggare JAV, Parikakis KA. Evaluation of the validity of tooth size and arch width measurements using conventional and three-dimensional virtual orthodontic models. Angle Orthod. 2003;73(3):301-6.
10. Stevens D, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: Comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;129(6):794-803.
11. Mullen SR, Martin CA, Ngan P, Gladwin M. Accuracy of space analysis with emodels and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132(3):346-52.
12. Moorees CFA, Reed RB. Biometrics of crowding and spacing of the teeth in the mandible. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1954;12(1):77-88.
13. Keene HJ, Engel G. The mandibular dental arch, part IV: prediction and prevention of lower anterior relapse. Angle Orthod. 1979;49(30):173-80.
14. Bushang PH, Dermirjian A, Cadotte L. Permanent mesiodistal tooth size of French-Canadians. J Can Dent Assoc. 1988;54(6):441-4.
15. Santoro M. Mesiodistal dimensions and tooth size discrepancy of the permanent dentition of Dominican americans. Angle Orthod. 2000;70(4):303-7.
16. Roberts CT, Richmond S. The design and analysis of reliability studies for the use of epidemiological and audit indices in orthodontics. Br J Orthod. 1997;24(2):139-47.
17. Santoro M, Galkin S, Teredesai M, Nicolay O, Cangialosi T. Comparison of measurements made on digital and plaster models. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(1):101-5.