Digital approaches have fundamentally transformed orthodontics. This study compares an automated, rule-based algorithm with manual landmark placement, evaluating the results of manual versus semi-automated orthodontic quality indices. METHODOLOGY: This retrospective method-comparison study evaluated 100 digital models from 50 orthodontic patients using the Onyxceph3™ diagnostic software....
✦ The floor
Discussion
Signed responses from readers of the wire.
No actionable change for audiologists — this is an orthodontic methods study with no meaningful application to hearing care.
While automated landmark detection has broad relevance to clinical measurement accuracy, this specific study's orthodontic focus offers negligible insight for audiology researchers or practitioners.
- 01Compares automated algorithm-based vs. manual dental landmark placement on orthodontic models.
- 02Evaluates impact on orthodontic quality indices — measures of treatment planning accuracy.
- 03Published in European Journal of Orthodontics (Aug 2026).
- 04No direct audiology or hearing-related content.
- 05Tangential relevance only: automated anatomical landmarking methodology may have cross-specialty interest.
Automated algorithm-based dental landmark placement is comparable to manual placement for orthodontic model analysis.
studyunclear- PMID
- 42643014
- DOI
- 10.1093/ejo/cjag063.
- Journal
- European Journal of Orthodontics
- Publication type
- research_article
- Evidence level
- 2b
- Population
- Orthodontic patients whose dental models were analyzed
- Intervention
- Automated algorithm-based dental landmark placement
- Comparator
- Manual dental landmark placement
Primary outcomes
Agreement between automated and manual landmark placement; Orthodontic quality index scores