References
- Jonke E, Prossinger H, Bookstein FL, et al. Secular trends in the facial skull from the 19th century to the present, analyzed with geometric morphometrics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;132(1):63–70.
- Weisensee KE, Jantz RL. Secular changes in craniofacial morphology of the Portuguese using geometric morphometrics. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2011;145(4):548–559.
- Little BB, Buschang PH, Peña Reyes ME, et al. Craniofacial dimensions in children in rural Oaxaca, Southern Mexico: secular change, 1968–2000. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2006;131(1):127–136.
- Jantz RL. Cranial change in Americans: 1850–1975. J Forensic Sci. 2001;46(4):784–787.
- Antoun JS, Cameron C, Sew Hoy W, et al. Evidence of secular trends in a collection of historical craniofacial growth studies. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37(1):60–66.
- Ishikawa H, Nakamura S, Iwasaki H, et al. Seven parameters describing anteroposterior jaw relationships: postpubertal prediction accuracy and interchangeability. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117(6):714–720.
- Gul EE, Fida M. A comparison of cephalometric analyses for assessing sagittal jaw relationship. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2008;18(11):679–683.
- Ahmed M, Shaikh A, Fida M. Diagnostic validity of different cephalometric analyses for assessment of the sagittal skeletal pattern. Dental Press J Orthod. 2018;23(5):75–81.
- Slavicek R. Die funktionellen Determinanten des Kauorgans [The functional determinants of the mastigatory organ]. Munich: Verlag Zahnärztlich-Medizinisches Schrifttum; 1984. German.
- Naretto S, Polastri C, Slavicek R. Occlusal plane related to skeletal pattern in mixed dentition stage: a descriptive cephalometric study. Int J Stomatol Occlusion Med. 2009;2(1):32–35.
- Slavicek R, Tajima K, Sudmann V. Importance of skeletal location of maxilla to determine the vertical dimension of occlusion. Int J Stomatol Occlusion Med. 2010;3(3):159–164.
- Adams GL, Gansky SA, Miller AJ, et al. Comparison between traditional 2-dimensional cephalometry and a 3-dimensional approach on human dry skulls. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;126(4):397–409.
- Lisboa CO, Masterson D, da Motta AF, et al. Reliability and reproducibility of three-dimensional cephalometric landmarks using CBCT: a systematic review. J Appl Oral Sci. 2015;23(2):112–119.
- Alves Proença HHF, Slavicek R, Cunha E, et al. A 3D computerized tomography study of changes in craniofacial morphology of Portuguese skulls from the eighteenth century to the present. Int J Stomatol Occlusion Med. 2014;7(2):33–45.
- INE. 2001 Census: definitive results. ISBN 972-673-602-1. ISSN 0872-6493. 2002. Portugal.
- Raposo R, Peleteiro B, Paco M, et al. Orthodontic camouflage versus orthodontic-orthognathic surgical treatment in class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018;47(4):445–455.
- Taylor CM. Changes in the relationship of nasion, point A, and point B and the effect upon ANB. Am J Orthod. 1969;56(2):143–163.
- Freeman RS. Adjusting A-N-B angles to reflect the effect of maxillary position. Angle Orthod. 1981;51(2):162–171.
- Alhammadi MS, Halboub E, Fayed MS, et al. Global distribution of malocclusion traits: A systematic review. Dental Press J Orthod. 2018;23(6):40.e01-e10.
- Nino-Sandoval TC, Guevara Perez SV, Gonzalez FA, et al. An automatic method for skeletal patterns classification using craniomaxillary variables on a Colombian population. Forensic Sci Int. 2016;261:159.e151–156.
- Brown AA, Scarfe WC, Scheetz JP, et al. Linear accuracy of cone beam CT derived 3D images. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(1):150–157.
- Bookstein FL. Reconsidering “The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics”. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;149(6):784–797.
- Moyers RE, Bookstein FL. The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics. Am J Orthod. 1979;75(6):599–617.