Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorSayar, Gülşılay
dc.contributor.authorKılınç, Delal Dara
dc.date.accessioned10.07.201910:49:13
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-10T19:35:23Z
dc.date.available10.07.201910:49:14
dc.date.available2019-07-10T19:35:23Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.citationSayar, G. ve Kılınç, D. D. (2017). Manual tracing versus smartphone application (app) tracing: A comparative study. Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 75(8), 588-594. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2017.1364420en_US
dc.identifier.issn0001-6357
dc.identifier.issn1502-3850
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/745
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2017.1364420
dc.description.abstractObjective: This study aimed to compare the results of conventional manual cephalometric tracing with those acquired with smartphone application cephalometric tracing. Materials and methods: The cephalometric radiographs of 55 patients (25 females and 30 males) were traced via the manual and app methods and were subsequently examined with Steiner’s analysis. Five skeletal measurements, five dental measurements and two soft tissue measurements were managed based on 21 landmarks. The durations of the performances of the two methods were also compared. Results: SNA (Sella, Nasion, A point angle) and SNB (Sella, Nasion, B point angle) values for the manual method were statistically lower (p <.001) than those for the app method. The ANB value for the manual method was statistically lower than that of app method. L1–NB (°) and upper lip protrusion values for the manual method were statistically higher than those for the app method. Go-GN/SN, U1–NA (°) and U1–NA (mm) values for manual method were statistically lower than those for the app method. No differences between the two methods were found in the L1–NB (mm), occlusal plane to SN, interincisal angle or lower lip protrusion values. Conclusions: Although statistically significant differences were found between the two methods, the cephalometric tracing proceeded faster with the app method than with the manual method.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTaylor and Francis Ltden_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectCephalometryen_US
dc.subjectSmartphone Applicationen_US
dc.subjectTracingen_US
dc.subjectMobile Technologiesen_US
dc.titleManual tracing versus smartphone application (app) tracing: A comparative studyen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.ispartofActa Odontologica Scandinavicaen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Ortodonti Ana Bilim Dalıen_US
dc.authorid0000-0003-3294-2644en_US
dc.authorid0000-0001-9009-6218en_US
dc.identifier.volume75en_US
dc.identifier.issue8en_US
dc.identifier.startpage588en_US
dc.identifier.endpage594en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/00016357.2017.1364420en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster