Concurrent validity of cephalometric analysis using smartphone application (oneCeph), Dolphin Imaging software, and conventional method

Objectives: The objective of the study is to compare the accuracy and reliability of cephalometric measurements using Dolphin Imaging software and Android application (OneCeph) to that of manual tracing. Material and Methods: 36 lateral cephalograms of patients between the ages of 18–25 years with Class I skeletal base were selected for this study. 15 parameters were selected for the study. All the cephalograms were traced manually as standard and then using Dolphin software and OneCeph application after calibration. The values obtained on selected parameters by manual, Dolphin Imaging software, and OneCeph were tabulated, and then agreement of selected cephalometric parameters by Dolphin Imaging software and OneCeph application was analyzed with that of manual tracing. Results: There was no significant difference found for any of the parameters selected done by different methods. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to sella-nasion-point A (SNA) and sella-nasion-point B (SNB). Regarding A-nasion-point B (ANB), OneCeph reported better correlation. Regarding lower incisor-nasion point B plane [LI-NB (°)] and LI-NB (°) both OneCeph and Dolphin reported similar correlation. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to N perpendicular to Point A, N perpendicular to Pogonion, Nasolabial angle. Regarding Jarabak’s ratio, OneCeph reported better correlation. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to frankfort mandibular plane angle (FMA), frankfort mandibular incisor plane angle (FMIA), incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA), and mandibular plane angle. Intraclass correlation coefficient values of Dolphin and OneCeph applications in relation to the manual method depicted that Dolphin software reported better correlation compared to OneCeph in assessing various parameters, considering the manual conventional method as gold standard reference. Conclusion: Android application (OneCeph) is a better alternative for cephalometric analysis but Dolphin Imaging software is more reliable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Advances in Dental Practice and Research
Published
2026-08-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25259/jadpr_14_2026
Primary Topic
Dental Radiography and Imaging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Concurrent validity of cephalometric analysis using smartphone application (oneCeph), Dolphin Imaging software, and conventional method

Tanhaz Kareem, Naveen Shamnur, Kiran Kumar, P. B. Basim et al.
Journal of Advances in Dental Practice and Research
Dental Radiography and Imaging
article

Concurrent validity of cephalometric analysis using smartphone application (oneCeph), Dolphin Imaging software, and conventional method

Tanhaz Kareem, Naveen Shamnur, Kiran Kumar, P. B. Basim, Sinchan V. Kumar
article en

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of the study is to compare the accuracy and reliability of cephalometric measurements using Dolphin Imaging software and Android application (OneCeph) to that of manual tracing. Material and Methods: 36 lateral cephalograms of patients between the ages of 18–25 years with Class I skeletal base were selected for this study. 15 parameters were selected for the study. All the cephalograms were traced manually as standard and then using Dolphin software and OneCeph application after calibration. The values obtained on selected parameters by manual, Dolphin Imaging software, and OneCeph were tabulated, and then agreement of selected cephalometric parameters by Dolphin Imaging software and OneCeph application was analyzed with that of manual tracing. Results: There was no significant difference found for any of the parameters selected done by different methods. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to sella-nasion-point A (SNA) and sella-nasion-point B (SNB). Regarding A-nasion-point B (ANB), OneCeph reported better correlation. Regarding lower incisor-nasion point B plane [LI-NB (°)] and LI-NB (°) both OneCeph and Dolphin reported similar correlation. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to N perpendicular to Point A, N perpendicular to Pogonion, Nasolabial angle. Regarding Jarabak’s ratio, OneCeph reported better correlation. Dolphin reported better correlation with regard to frankfort mandibular plane angle (FMA), frankfort mandibular incisor plane angle (FMIA), incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA), and mandibular plane angle. Intraclass correlation coefficient values of Dolphin and OneCeph applications in relation to the manual method depicted that Dolphin software reported better correlation compared to OneCeph in assessing various parameters, considering the manual conventional method as gold standard reference. Conclusion: Android application (OneCeph) is a better alternative for cephalometric analysis but Dolphin Imaging software is more reliable.

Journal of Advances in Dental Practice and ResearchVol. 5
Indian Institute of Technology Palakkad (IN), Bapuji Dental College and Hospital (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Dental Radiography and Imaging
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.