Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”

Of all the articles on cephalometrics this journal has published over the last half-century, the one most cited across the scientific literature is the 1979 lecture “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics” by Robert Moyers and me. But the durable salience of this article is perplexing,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics 2016-06, Vol.149 (6), p.784-797
1. Verfasser: Bookstein, Fred L
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 797
container_issue 6
container_start_page 784
container_title American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics
container_volume 149
creator Bookstein, Fred L
description Of all the articles on cephalometrics this journal has published over the last half-century, the one most cited across the scientific literature is the 1979 lecture “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics” by Robert Moyers and me. But the durable salience of this article is perplexing, as its critique was misdirected (it should have been aimed at the craniometrics of the early twentieth century, not merely the roentgenographic extension used in the orthodontic clinic) and its proposed remedies have all failed to establish themselves as methods of any broad utility. When problems highlighted by Moyers and me have been resolved at all, the innovations that resolved them owe to tools very different from those suggested in our article and imported from fields quite a bit farther from biometrics than we expected back in 1979. One of these tools was the creation de novo of a new abstract mathematical construction, statistical shape space, in the 1980s and 1990s; another was a flexible and intuitive new graphic, the thin-plate spline, for meaningfully and suggestively visualizing a wide variety of biological findings in these spaces. On the other hand, many of the complaints Moyers and I enunciated back in 1979, especially those stemming from the disarticulation of morphometrics from the explanatory styles and purposes of clinical medicine, remain unanswered even today. The present essay, a retrospective historical meditation, reviews the context of the 1979 publication, its major themes, and its relevance today. This essay is dedicated to the memory of Robert E. Moyers on the 100th anniversary of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.011
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4888914</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0889540616001232</els_id><sourcerecordid>1793213843</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-83db73f8ad3febac9af5a819a01801ae962d3cf53a08038ab5c3a100f9734a573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUstuFDEQtBCIbAJfgITmyGWGbnsengORUAQJUiQkCGer19OT9TA7XuzZlXLLh8DP5UvwsiECLpx8cFV1dVUL8QKhQMD69VDQ4DtfSMCqQFkA4iOxQGibvG4q-VgsQOs2r0qoj8RxjAMAtKWEp-JINrLEVjcLcfGJrZ-i6zi46Tq7u_1-teLMTbTZBL8JjmaeOMbM91nC7XianZ9ozCxvVjT6Nc_B2Xh3--OZeNLTGPn5_Xsivrx_d3V2kV9-PP9w9vYyt5WGOdeqWzaq19SpnpdkW-or0tgSoAYkbmvZKdtXikCD0rSsrCIE6NtGlVQ16kScHnQ32-WaO5scBRpNsrqmcGM8OfP3z-RW5trvTKlTGlgmgVf3AsF_23KczdpFy-NIE_ttNNi0SqLSpUpQdYDa4GMM3D-MQTD7DsxgfnVg9h0YlCZ1kFgv_3T4wPkdegK8OQA45bRzHEy0jifLnQtsZ9N5958Bp__w7egmZ2n8yjccB78NqaK0iYmJYD7vz2B_BVgDoFRS_QS7SLIm</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1793213843</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Bookstein, Fred L</creator><creatorcontrib>Bookstein, Fred L</creatorcontrib><description>Of all the articles on cephalometrics this journal has published over the last half-century, the one most cited across the scientific literature is the 1979 lecture “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics” by Robert Moyers and me. But the durable salience of this article is perplexing, as its critique was misdirected (it should have been aimed at the craniometrics of the early twentieth century, not merely the roentgenographic extension used in the orthodontic clinic) and its proposed remedies have all failed to establish themselves as methods of any broad utility. When problems highlighted by Moyers and me have been resolved at all, the innovations that resolved them owe to tools very different from those suggested in our article and imported from fields quite a bit farther from biometrics than we expected back in 1979. One of these tools was the creation de novo of a new abstract mathematical construction, statistical shape space, in the 1980s and 1990s; another was a flexible and intuitive new graphic, the thin-plate spline, for meaningfully and suggestively visualizing a wide variety of biological findings in these spaces. On the other hand, many of the complaints Moyers and I enunciated back in 1979, especially those stemming from the disarticulation of morphometrics from the explanatory styles and purposes of clinical medicine, remain unanswered even today. The present essay, a retrospective historical meditation, reviews the context of the 1979 publication, its major themes, and its relevance today. This essay is dedicated to the memory of Robert E. Moyers on the 100th anniversary of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0889-5406</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6752</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27241987</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Cephalometry - history ; Cephalometry - standards ; Dentistry ; History, 20th Century ; Humans</subject><ispartof>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2016-06, Vol.149 (6), p.784-797</ispartof><rights>American Association of Orthodontists</rights><rights>2016 American Association of Orthodontists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-83db73f8ad3febac9af5a819a01801ae962d3cf53a08038ab5c3a100f9734a573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-83db73f8ad3febac9af5a819a01801ae962d3cf53a08038ab5c3a100f9734a573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.011$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27241987$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bookstein, Fred L</creatorcontrib><title>Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”</title><title>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</title><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><description>Of all the articles on cephalometrics this journal has published over the last half-century, the one most cited across the scientific literature is the 1979 lecture “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics” by Robert Moyers and me. But the durable salience of this article is perplexing, as its critique was misdirected (it should have been aimed at the craniometrics of the early twentieth century, not merely the roentgenographic extension used in the orthodontic clinic) and its proposed remedies have all failed to establish themselves as methods of any broad utility. When problems highlighted by Moyers and me have been resolved at all, the innovations that resolved them owe to tools very different from those suggested in our article and imported from fields quite a bit farther from biometrics than we expected back in 1979. One of these tools was the creation de novo of a new abstract mathematical construction, statistical shape space, in the 1980s and 1990s; another was a flexible and intuitive new graphic, the thin-plate spline, for meaningfully and suggestively visualizing a wide variety of biological findings in these spaces. On the other hand, many of the complaints Moyers and I enunciated back in 1979, especially those stemming from the disarticulation of morphometrics from the explanatory styles and purposes of clinical medicine, remain unanswered even today. The present essay, a retrospective historical meditation, reviews the context of the 1979 publication, its major themes, and its relevance today. This essay is dedicated to the memory of Robert E. Moyers on the 100th anniversary of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.</description><subject>Cephalometry - history</subject><subject>Cephalometry - standards</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>History, 20th Century</subject><subject>Humans</subject><issn>0889-5406</issn><issn>1097-6752</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUstuFDEQtBCIbAJfgITmyGWGbnsengORUAQJUiQkCGer19OT9TA7XuzZlXLLh8DP5UvwsiECLpx8cFV1dVUL8QKhQMD69VDQ4DtfSMCqQFkA4iOxQGibvG4q-VgsQOs2r0qoj8RxjAMAtKWEp-JINrLEVjcLcfGJrZ-i6zi46Tq7u_1-teLMTbTZBL8JjmaeOMbM91nC7XianZ9ozCxvVjT6Nc_B2Xh3--OZeNLTGPn5_Xsivrx_d3V2kV9-PP9w9vYyt5WGOdeqWzaq19SpnpdkW-or0tgSoAYkbmvZKdtXikCD0rSsrCIE6NtGlVQ16kScHnQ32-WaO5scBRpNsrqmcGM8OfP3z-RW5trvTKlTGlgmgVf3AsF_23KczdpFy-NIE_ttNNi0SqLSpUpQdYDa4GMM3D-MQTD7DsxgfnVg9h0YlCZ1kFgv_3T4wPkdegK8OQA45bRzHEy0jifLnQtsZ9N5958Bp__w7egmZ2n8yjccB78NqaK0iYmJYD7vz2B_BVgDoFRS_QS7SLIm</recordid><startdate>20160601</startdate><enddate>20160601</enddate><creator>Bookstein, Fred L</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160601</creationdate><title>Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”</title><author>Bookstein, Fred L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c580t-83db73f8ad3febac9af5a819a01801ae962d3cf53a08038ab5c3a100f9734a573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Cephalometry - history</topic><topic>Cephalometry - standards</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>History, 20th Century</topic><topic>Humans</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bookstein, Fred L</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bookstein, Fred L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”</atitle><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><date>2016-06-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>149</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>784</spage><epage>797</epage><pages>784-797</pages><issn>0889-5406</issn><eissn>1097-6752</eissn><abstract>Of all the articles on cephalometrics this journal has published over the last half-century, the one most cited across the scientific literature is the 1979 lecture “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics” by Robert Moyers and me. But the durable salience of this article is perplexing, as its critique was misdirected (it should have been aimed at the craniometrics of the early twentieth century, not merely the roentgenographic extension used in the orthodontic clinic) and its proposed remedies have all failed to establish themselves as methods of any broad utility. When problems highlighted by Moyers and me have been resolved at all, the innovations that resolved them owe to tools very different from those suggested in our article and imported from fields quite a bit farther from biometrics than we expected back in 1979. One of these tools was the creation de novo of a new abstract mathematical construction, statistical shape space, in the 1980s and 1990s; another was a flexible and intuitive new graphic, the thin-plate spline, for meaningfully and suggestively visualizing a wide variety of biological findings in these spaces. On the other hand, many of the complaints Moyers and I enunciated back in 1979, especially those stemming from the disarticulation of morphometrics from the explanatory styles and purposes of clinical medicine, remain unanswered even today. The present essay, a retrospective historical meditation, reviews the context of the 1979 publication, its major themes, and its relevance today. This essay is dedicated to the memory of Robert E. Moyers on the 100th anniversary of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>27241987</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.011</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0889-5406
ispartof American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2016-06, Vol.149 (6), p.784-797
issn 0889-5406
1097-6752
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4888914
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Cephalometry - history
Cephalometry - standards
Dentistry
History, 20th Century
Humans
title Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-02T18%3A38%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Reconsidering%20%E2%80%9CThe%20inappropriateness%20of%20conventional%20cephalometrics%E2%80%9D&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20orthodontics%20and%20dentofacial%20orthopedics&rft.au=Bookstein,%20Fred%20L&rft.date=2016-06-01&rft.volume=149&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=784&rft.epage=797&rft.pages=784-797&rft.issn=0889-5406&rft.eissn=1097-6752&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1793213843%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1793213843&rft_id=info:pmid/27241987&rft_els_id=S0889540616001232&rfr_iscdi=true