ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2023
Smartphone Integration of Artificial Intelligence for Automated Plagiocephaly Diagnosis.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of goal attainment for helmet therapy versus conservative management for positional plagiocephaly in infants.Clinical and experimental pediatrics · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Pediatric Craniofacial Surgery.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Artificial intelligence in plastic surgery, where do we stand?JPRAS open · 2024Review
- Smartphone Photogrammetric Assessment for Head Measurements.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Positional plagiocephaly is a pediatric condition with important cosmetic implications affecting ∼40% of infants under 12 months of age. Early diagnosis and treatment initiation is imperative in achieving satisfactory outcomes; improved diagnostic modalities are needed to support this goal. This study aimed to determine whether a smartphone-based artificial intelligence tool could diagnose positional plagiocephaly. Methods: A prospective validation study was conducted at a large tertiary care center with two recruitment sites: (1) newborn nursery, (2) pediatric craniofacial surgery clinic. Eligible children were aged 0-12 months with no history of hydrocephalus, intracranial tumors, intracranial hemorrhage, intracranial hardware, or prior craniofacial surgery. Successful artificial intelligence diagnosis required identification of the presence and severity of positional plagiocephaly. Results: A total of 89 infants were prospectively enrolled from the craniofacial surgery clinic (n = 25, 17 male infants [68%], eight female infants [32%], mean age 8.44 months) and newborn nursery (n = 64, 29 male infants [45%], 25 female infants [39%], mean age 0 months). The model obtained a diagnostic accuracy of 85.39% compared with a standard clinical examination with a disease prevalence of 48%. Sensitivity was 87.50% [95% CI, 75.94-98.42] with a specificity of 83.67% [95% CI, 72.35-94.99]. Precision was 81.40%, while likelihood ratios (positive and negative) were 5.36 and 0.15, respectively. The F1-score was 84.34%. Conclusions: The smartphone-based artificial intelligence algorithm accurately diagnosed positional plagiocephaly in a clinical environment. This technology may provide value by helping guide specialist consultation and enabling longitudinal quantitative monitoring of cranial shape.
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.