ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Multidimensional quantitative characterization of periocular morphology: distinguishing esotropia from epicanthus by deep learning network.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-based Assessment of Eyelid and Periorbital Parameters: Assisting Diagnosis and Treatment Planning in Blepharoptosis.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- YOLO AI model based on an automated breast volume scanner for the detection of benign and malignant breast lesions.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prominent epicanthus could not only diminish the eyes' aesthetics but may be deceptive for its typical appearance of pseudo-esotropia. This study aims to apply a deep learning model to characterize the periocular morphology for preliminary identification. Methods: This prospective study consecutively included 300 subjects visiting the ophthalmology department in a tertiary referral hospital. Children aged 7-18 years with simple epicanthus or concomitant esotropia and healthy volunteers who were age- and gender-matched were eligible for inclusion. Multiple metrics were extracted automatically and manually from facial images to characterize the periocular morphology and binocular symmetry. The dice coefficient (Dice), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and Bland-Altman biases were calculated to evaluate their consistency. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve determined the cut-off values of symmetry indexes (SIs) for distinguishing concomitant esotropia subjects from epicanthus ones. Results: The Dice for eyelid and cornea segmentation were 0.949 and 0.944, respectively. The ICCs of the two measurements ranged from 0.898 to 0.983. Biases ranged from 0.16 to 0.74 mm. The periocular morphology of epicanthus eyes was significantly different from the normal ones, including palpebral fissure width (21.41±1.53 Conclusions: Our study established a standard deep learning system for characterizing the periocular morphology of epicanthus and esotropia eyes with great accuracy. This objective method could be generalized to other periocular morphological assessments for clinical care.
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.