ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2021
Visual facial perception of postsurgical cleft lip scarring assessed by laypeople via eye-tracking.
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Influence of Scar Patterns After Reduction Mammoplasty on Eye Movement and Gaze Pattern: An Eye-Tracking Investigation.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2024Article
- The Use of Eye-Tracking Technology in Pediatric Orofacial Clefts: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Use of Eye-tracking Technology in Cleft Lip: A Literature Review.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the visual facial perception in response to scars associated with repaired cleft lip (CL) on a male adolescent model, as assessed by eye-tracking technology. MATERIAL AND
methodsUnilateral and bilateral facial images of repaired CL on the upper lip and nasal asymmetry were added to an image of a male adolescent model, using Photoshop CS5 software. 40 laypeople eye movements were tracked by an infrared sensor of the Eye Tribe hardware in conjunction with OGAMA software. An analysis of variance was used to identify differences in total fixation time for the added areas of interest. A visual analog scale of attractiveness with a questionnaire were also incorporated into the study. Statistical analysis was performed using a significance level of
resultsSignificant differences were noted between the image with no scar and the image featuring a unilateral scar for total fixation time associated with the right eye (p = 0.002) and right nose area (p = 0.003), in addition to the numbers of fixations for the right eye (p = 0.005) and right nose area (p = 0.007). Comparing the image with no scar with the image featuring a bilateral scar showed a significant difference only for the number of fixations on the right eye (p = 0.005). The heatmaps and fixation point maps for both the unilateral and bilateral scar images indicated increased fixation for the scar areas. For the image with no scar, increased fixation was captured for the right eye area. Pearson's correlation coefficient test showed a moderate positive (p = 0.692) relationship when comparing to unilateral and bilateral cleft scars.
conclusionsThe participating laypeople perceived the cleft-repaired faces and did not perceive any difference in attractiveness between the images featuring the unilateral and bilateral postsurgical clefts and lip scarring.
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.