ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2024
Prioritising quality: investigating the influence of image quality on forensic facial comparison.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Morphological analysis in forensic facial comparison was recently validated for judicial use. However, no image quality assurance systems exist for this purpose, despite image triage being considered the best practice approach. Hence, this study aimed at testing a semi-quantitative scoring method to assess image quality and investigated facial image resolution and lighting quality quantitatively in a context of forensic facial comparison. For this purpose, 400 facial comparison photographic and CCTV image pools developed from the Wits Face Database were used. These facial images were analysed in prior studies that investigated the validity of morphological analysis. A semi-quantitative image quality scoring system was adapted and tested on the above sample and compared across correct and incorrect matches obtained as part of previous studies using a logistic regression model. In addition, facial images were cropped to the closest pixel comprising the face, head and neck areas; then, a face-to-image pixel proportion was calculated as an estimator of resolution quality; and pixel exposure qualities were obtained to be compared to facial comparison outcomes. Ideal and high image quality scores were related to correctness of matches, while low-quality scores were related to incorrect matches. High pixel proportions were related to true matches and low exposure was related to false positives, while high exposure was related to false negatives. These results suggest that an easy method for image triage could be employed by scoring image quality. Quantitative measures should be investigated further for thresholding quality suitability for confidence of facial comparisons.
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.