Correction: Influence of patient motion on definition of typical cephalometric reference points in digital horizontally scanning cephalometric radiography

Correction: Head Face Med 21, 18 (2025)

https://doiorg.publicaciones.saludcastillayleon.es/10.1186/s13005-025-00491-z

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed that some additional corrections in the corrected proof were not implemented. Therefore, the authors have requested to take the missed corrections, which are stated below, into consideration. The original article has been corrected.

Missed corrections:

• In Background section within the Abstract, the text “which form the basis of treatment planning” should be deleted.

• In Results section within the Abstract, the text “, but large enough to greatly influence a treatment plan” should be deleted.

• (Line 59–60). In the sentence “There is no research so far investigating how orthodontic treatment planning is affected by inaccuracies of cephalometric reference points due to movement.” the text “treatment planning” should be replaced with “cephalometric analysis”.

• (Line 188–192). In the sentence “Regarding the cephalometric angles ANB angle (Ceph0: 7.5°) turned out to be a little less affected by patient motion than Maxillo-Mandibular Plane Angle (ANSPNS to Me-Go) (Ceph0: 74.8°) (Fig. 9), but large enough to influence a treatment plan.” the texts “, but large enough to influence a treatment plan” should be deleted.

• (Line 316–322). The sentence “From our observations from assessment of typical cephalometric reference points we conclude, that patient motion, particularly parallel to the scanning direction of the fan-beam-detector unit, heavily influence distances parallel to this direction and, to a lesser extent also angles, relevant for orthodontic treatment planning” should be corrected to “From our observations from assessment of typical cephalometric reference points we conclude, that patient motion, particularly parallel to the scanning direction of the fan-beam-detector unit, heavily influence clinically relevant distances parallel to this direction”.

• (Line 325–327). The sentence “In order to ensure optimal patient head stabilisation, the use of ear rods in conjunction with a chin rest is strongly advised” should be deleted.

• (Line 352–357). The text “KM did the data curation and investigation, and was writing the original draft. CK validated and visualized the methodology, and was writing the original draft. RB and US were responsible for the acquisition of the cephalometric radiographs and the technical aspects, they reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript” should be deleted, as this part was written twice.