ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2022
Reproducibility of Novel Soft-Tissue Landmarks on Three-Dimensional Human Facial Scan Images in Caucasian and Asian.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accuracy of Facial Digitization Using a New Mobile Device-Compatible 3D Scanner for Malocclusion.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the Reproducibility of Auricular Subunit Markers Based on Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- Measurement of Nasal Contour Landmarks in Septorhinoplasties with Special Regard to the Course of Postoperative Swelling Using a Three-Dimensional Camera.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison Study of Extraction Accuracy of 3D Facial Anatomical Landmarks Based on Non-Rigid Registration of Face Template.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Intra- and Interrater Agreement of Face Esthetic Analysis in 3D Face Images.BioMed research international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThree-dimensional surface imaging is established in many disciplines for objective facial acquisition regarding anthropometry. Former studies addressed the validation of landmark-based measurements for single race. In order to distinguish racial difference, the reproducibility of the landmark measurements must first be validated.
objectivesOur purpose is to validate the reproducibility of 46 facial soft-tissue landmarks on x, y, z axes to prove their reliability as 3D reference points.
methodsThe study included 80 European Caucasian and 80 Chinese volunteers. Standardized 3D surface imaging was performed using Vectra 3D system. Two raters identified and defined 46 landmarks (138 coordinates), then repeatedly 3D-imaged volunteers' facial region in separate sessions. Coordinates' reproducibility of landmarks is divided into three categories (< 0.5 mm, < 1 mm, and >1 mm) for intra- and inter-rater reproducibility assessments.
resultsCoordinates' reproducibility of 160 samples was distributed as follows: Intra-rater: < 0.5 mm (45%), < 1 mm (42%), >1 mm (13%); inter-rater: < 0.5 mm (31.2%), < 1 mm (42%), > 1 mm (26.8%). The reproducibility of landmarks in nasal tip region differs slightly between Caucasians and Asians. Compared to females, males typically have higher landmark reproducibility in lip and chin region. However, there were no differences in the reproducibility ranking of landmarks by gender.
conclusionThe majority of the 46 landmarks in the 3D plane are reproducible to 1 mm, which is clinically acceptable. All selected landmarks showed strong consistency across race and gender, suggesting their potential use as reference points in prospective clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.