ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
AI-Assisted Versus Conventional Orthodontic Diagnosis and Treatment Planning
This study compared an artificial intelligence-assisted orthodontic diagnostic workflow using WebCeph with a conventional clinician-based workflow. The study included 120 new orthodontic patients treated at Ben Hafeed Dental Center in Sana'a, Yemen, between March 2024 and March 2026. For each participant, the researchers prepared a de-identified package of routine pretreatment records, including clinical findings, extraoral and intraoral photographs, panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs, and dental models or digital scans. The same case package was independently assessed using both the artificial intelligence-assisted and conventional workflows. An independent panel of five expert orthodontists reviewed the cases and established the reference standard. The main outcome was agreement with the expert panel for skeletal sagittal classification as Class I, Class II, or Class III. Other outcomes included orthodontic treatment-need grades, premolar extraction decisions, anchorage planning, appliance selection, and the time required to complete each diagnostic workflow. Participation did not alter the routine orthodontic care provided to patients, and final clinical decisions remained the responsibility of the treating orthodontist.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Validation of AI-Based Cephalometric Analysis in Orthodontics#896872
- Comparison of Digital Analysis and Artificial Intelligence for Cephalometric Tracing#863601
- Time and Cost-implications of Intraoral Scans Vs Alginate Impressions#1031682
- Assessment of Mesiodistal Root Angulation Without Radiographic Guidance Versus CBCT Guidance: A Cross Sectional Study.#888986
- Oral Specimen and Data Acquisition Study of Subjects Requiring Third Molar Removal#902468
Record · ID 982771
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive