1. Millett D, Gravely JF. The assessment of antero-posterior dental base relationships. Br J Orthod 1991; 18:285-97. [
DOI:10.1179/bjo.18.4.285] [
PMID]
2. Zupancic S, Pohar M, Farcnik F, Ovsenik M. Overjet as a predictor of sagittal skeletal relationships. Eur J Orthod 2008 ; 30(3):269-73. [
DOI:10.1093/ejo/cjm130] [
PMID]
3. Fattahi HR, Pakshir HR, Molaverdi F. A New Index (μ-angle) for Evaluating Sagittal Jaw Relationship in Comparison with β- Angle; A Cephalometric Study. Shiraz Dent J 2006; 7(1,2):81-8. [
Google Scholar]
4. Reidel RA. The relation of maxillary structures to cranium in malocclusion and in normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 1952; 22:142-5. [
Google Scholar]
5. Al-Abdwani R, Moles D, Noar JH. Change of Incisor Inclination Effects on Points A and B. Angle Orthod 2009;79(3):462-7.
https://doi.org/10.2319/0003-3219(2009)079[0462:COIIEO]2.0.CO;2 [
DOI:10.2319/041708-218.1]
6. Jacobson A. radiographic cephalometry from basics to video imaging. 1st ed. Chicago, Quintessence: Publishing Co, Inc.; 1995. [
URL]
7. Kim YH, Vietas JJ. Anteroposterior dysplasia indicator: an adjunct to cephalometric differential diagnosis. Am J Orthod 1978;73:619-33. [
DOI:10.1016/0002-9416(78)90223-3]
8. Jacobson A. The 'wits' appraisal of the jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod 1975;67:125-38. [
DOI:10.1016/0002-9416(75)90065-2]
9. Jacobson A. The 'wits' appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;124:470-9. [
DOI:10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00540-7]
10. Marinho Del Santo Jr. Influence of occlusal plane inclination on ANB and Wits assessments of anteroposterior jaw relationships. Am J Orthod Dentof Orthop 2006; 129:641-8. [
DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.025] [
PMID]
11. Haynes S, Chau M. The reproducibility and repeatability of the wits analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;107:640-7. [
DOI:10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70108-7]
12. Demisch A, Gebauer U, Zila W. Comparison of three cephalometric measurement of sagittal jaw relationship-angle ANB, Wits appraisal and AB-occlusal angle. Trans Eur Orthod Soc 1977; 105(4):269-81.
13. Rushton R, Cohen AM, linney FD. The relationship and reproducibility of angle ANB and the 'wits' appraisal. Br J Orthod 1991;18:225-31. [
DOI:10.1179/bjo.18.3.225] [
PMID]
14. Sherman SL, Woods M, Nanda RS. The longitudinal effects of growth on the wits appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofaac Orthop 1988:93:429-36. [
DOI:10.1016/0889-5406(88)90103-5]
15. Nanda RS, Merrill RM. Cephalometric assessment of sagittal relationship between maxilla and mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:328-44. [
DOI:10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70127-X]
16. Hall-Scott J. The maxillary - mandibular planes angle (MM) bisector:A new reference plane for antero-posterior measurement of the dental bases. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:583-91. [
DOI:10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70143-1]
17. Ferrario VF, Serrao G, Ciusa V, Morini M, Sforza C. Cephalometric and in vivo measurements of maxillomandibular anteroposterior discrepancies: apreliminary regression study. Angle Orthod 2002;72:579-84. [
Google Scholar]
18. Hurmerinta K, Rahkamo A, Haavikko K. Comparison between cephalometric classification methods for sagittal jaw relationships. Eur J Oral Sci 1997;105(3):221-7. [
DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0722.1997.tb00204.x] [
PMID]
19. Sarhan OA. A new cephalomtric parameter to aid in dental base relationship analysis. Angle Orthod 1988;60(1):59-64. [
Google Scholar]
20. Baik CY, Ververidou M. A new approach of assessing sagittal discrepancies: the Beta Angle. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004; 126:100-5. [
DOI:10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.08.026] [
PMID]
21. Day S, Graham D. Sample size estimation for comparing two or more treatment groups in clinical trial. Stat Med 1991;10:33 -43. [
DOI:10.1002/sim.4780100109] [
PMID]
22. Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 4th ed. St. louise, Missouri: Mosby Elsevier; 2013. [
URL]
23. Basafa M, Gahanbeen A. Comparative Assessment of Accuracy of Contemporary Cephalometric Analysis in Diagnosis of Antero-posterior Jaw Relationship. Shiraz Univ Dent J 2005; 6 (1,2):1-9. [
Google Scholar]
24. Dunn G. Design and analysis of reliability studies, the statistical evaluation of measurement errors. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1989. P.5-10. [
Google Scholar]
25. Dale JG, Dale HC. Interceptive guidance of occlusion with emphasis ondiagnosis. In Graber Thomas M. Vanarsdall Robert L. Orthodontics Current principles and techniques. 3rd ed. St. louise, Mosby; 2000. P:376. [
Google Scholar]
26. Aparna P, Kumar D, Prasad M, Shamnur N, Kumar A, KR S, et al. Comparative assessment of sagittalskeletal discrepancy: a cephalometric study. J Clin Diagn Res 2015; 9(4):38-41. [
Google Scholar]
27. Hajighadimi M, Dougherty HL, Garakani F. Cephalometric evaluation of Iranian children and its comparison with Tweed's and Steiner's standards. Am J Orthod 1981; 79(2): 192-7. [
DOI:10.1016/0002-9416(81)90317-1]
28. Moorrees CFA. Normal variation and its bearing on the use of cephalometric radiographs in orthodontic diagnosis. Am J Orthod 1953; 39:942-50. [
DOI:10.1016/0002-9416(53)90153-5]
29. Prasad M, Reddy KP, Talapaneni AK, Chaitanya N, Bhaskar Reddy MV, Patil R. Establishment of norms of the beta angle to assess the sagittal discrepancy for Nellore districtpopulation. J Nat Sci Biol Med 2013;4(2):409-13. [
DOI:10.4103/0976-9668.117017] [
PMID] [
PMCID]
30. Singh G, Verma S, Singh DP, Yadav SK, Yadav AB. Correlation of Beta Angle with Antero-Posterior Dysplasia Indicators and FMA: An Institution Based Cephalometric Study. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(11): 75-8. [
DOI:10.7860/JCDR/2016/23553.8912] [
PMID] [
PMCID]
31. Proffit WR, Sarver DM. Diagnosis: Gathering and organizing the appropriate information. In: Proffit WR, White RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity. 1st ed. St. louise, Mosby; 2000. P.149.