ArticleHealthcare technology letters2024
Facial and mandibular landmark tracking with habitual head posture estimation using linear and fiducial markers.
Article in Healthcare technology letters, 2024. 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.
- Understanding Occlusion and Temporomandibular Joint Function Using Deep Learning and Predictive Modeling.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2024Review
- Predictive modelling of freeway space utilising clinical history, normalised muscle activity, dental occlusion, and mandibular movement analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Facial and mandibular landmark tracking with habitual head posture estimation using linear and fiducial markers.Healthcare technology letters · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study compared the accuracy of facial landmark measurements using deep learning-based fiducial marker (FM) and arbitrary width reference (AWR) approaches. It quantitatively analysed mandibular hard and soft tissue lateral excursions and head tilting from consumer camera footage of 37 participants. A custom deep learning system recognised facial landmarks for measuring head tilt and mandibular lateral excursions. Circular fiducial markers (FM) and inter-zygion measurements (AWR) were validated against physical measurements using electrognathography and electronic rulers. Results showed notable differences in lower and mid-face estimations for both FM and AWR compared to physical measurements. The study also demonstrated the comparability of both approaches in assessing lateral movement, though fiducial markers exhibited variability in mid-face and lower face parameter assessments. Regardless of the technique applied, hard tissue movement was typically seen to be 30% less than soft tissue among the participants. Additionally, a significant number of participants consistently displayed a 5 to 10° head tilt.
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.