Cited by 235Dental Radiography and ImagingOrthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsMedical Imaging and Analysis

Evaluation and Comparison of Anatomical Landmark Detection Methods for Cephalometric X-Ray Images: A Grand Challenge

Wang, Ching-Wei, Huang, Cheng-Ta, Hsieh, Meng-Che, Li, Chung-Hsing, Chang, Sheng-Wei, Li, Wei-Cheng, Vandaele, Remy, Maree, Raphael +9 more·2015·IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging

Abstract

Cephalometric analysis is an essential clinical and research tool in orthodontics for the orthodontic analysis and treatment planning. This paper presents the evaluation of the methods submitted to the Automatic Cephalometric X-Ray Landmark Detection Challenge, held at the IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging 2014 with an on-site competition. The challenge was set to explore and compare automatic landmark detection methods in application to cephalometric X-ray images. Methods were evaluated on a common database including cephalograms of 300 patients aged six to 60 years, collected from the Dental Department, Tri-Service General Hospital, Taiwan, and manually marked anatomical landmarks as the ground truth data, generated by two experienced medical doctors. Quantitative evaluation was performed to compare the results of a representative selection of current methods submitted to the challenge. Experimental results show that three methods are able to achieve detection rates greater than 80% using the 4 mm precision range, but only one method achieves a detection rate greater than 70% using the 2 mm precision range, which is the acceptable precision range in clinical practice. The study provides insights into the performance of different landmark detection approaches under real-world conditions and highlights achievements and limitations of current image analysis techniques.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tmi.2015.2412951

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, C.-W., Huang, C.-T., Hsieh, M.-C., Li, C.-H., Chang, S.-W., Li, W.-C., Vandaele, R., Maree, R., Jodogne, S., Geurts, P., Chen, C., Zheng, G., Chu, C., Mirzaalian, H., Hamarneh, G., Vrtovec, T., & Ibragimov, B.
Affiliations
  • National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (TW)
  • Tri-Service General Hospital (TW)
  • University of Liège (BE)
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • Simon Fraser University (CA)
  • University of Ljubljana (SI)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging
Published
2015-09
Volume
34
Issue
9
Pages
1890-1900
ISSN
  • 0278-0062 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-254X
OpenAlex
W1995003188
Cited by
235
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3
FWCI
9.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Cytomine research (n° 1017072)
  • Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST-101-2628-E-011-006-MY3)
  • Tri-Service General Hospital-National Taiwan University of Science and Technology Joint Research Program (TSGH-NTUST-102-02, TSGH-NTUST-103-02)
  • Slovenian Research Agency (P2-0232 and L2-4072)
  • FNRS-Télévie
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Dental Radiography and Imaging
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Medical Imaging and Analysis
Keywords
cephalometric landmark detection, cephalogram, automatic landmark detection, orthodontics, detection accuracy evaluation, ground truth, orthodontic treatment planning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Cephalometry, Child, Head, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Middle Aged, Radiography, Dental, Young Adult, Anatomic Landmarks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review