ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2024
Defining Standard Values for FaceReader Facial Expression Software Output.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decoding Social Cues: A Scoping Review of AI-Supported Emotional Competencies and Their Impact on School-Aged Populations.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Review
- Effectiveness of Socially Assistive Robots in Promoting Positive Emotional Responses and Alleviating Postoperative Pain Among Children: Quantitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Rewiring faces: advances and outcomes in facial nerve reconstruction after facial vascularized composite allotransplantation.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Review
- Neural signals gradually shift towards inferior frontal gyrus and long-term effects following facial imitation-based social learning.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- Impact of orthognathic surgery on emotional expression and smile aesthetics in Chinese patients as measured by FaceReader: a before-and-after study.Archives of craniofacial surgery · 2025Article
- Application of Artificial Intelligence Software to Identify Emotions of Lung Cancer Patients in Preoperative Health Education: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaceReader is a validated software package that uses computer vision technology for facial expression recognition which has become increasingly popular in academic research to expedite, scale, and decrease the cost of facial emotion analysis. In this study, we compare FaceReader analysis to human evaluator interpretation in order to define standard values for the software output.
methodsRandomly generated facial images produced by generative adversarial networks were analyzed using FaceReader and by survey participants (n=496). The age, facial emotion, and intensity of emotion as determined by the software and survey participants were recorded. Results were analyzed and compared.
results80 randomly generated images (20 children, 20 young adult, 20 middle aged, and 20 elderly; 38 male and 42 female) were included. Analysis of correlation between most common expression identified by FaceReader and the primary emotion detected by surveyors showed strong correlation (κ = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.64-0.91). On analyzing this correlation by age group, there was fair correlation in children (κ = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.078-0.72), perfect correlation in young adults (κ = 1.0, 95% CI = 1.0-1.0), strong correlation in middle aged adults (κ = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.53-1) and near perfect in elderly adults(κ = 0.9 , 95% CI = 0.7-1.0).
conclusionsWe provided the first study defining the expected average values generated by FaceReader in generally smiling images. This can be used as a standard in future studies. 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
37460734What 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.