ArticleInternational dental journal2025
Influence of Head Circumference on the Accuracy of Facial Scanning: An In vitro Study.
Article in International dental journal, 2025. 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.
- Evaluation of Trueness and Precision in Extraoral 3D Facial Scanning Systems Using a 3D-Printed Head Model: An In Vitro Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
objectivesThis study aimed to investigate the impact of head circumference on the accuracy of three-dimensional (3D) facial scans, focusing on trueness and precision across three mannequin heads of different sizes. MATERIAL AND
methodsThree 3D-printed mannequin heads with circumferences of 30, 50, and 65 cm were used. Ten facial landmarks were identified to measure seven interlandmark distances and two angles. Direct anthropometric measurement, serving as the reference value, was taken using a digital vernier calliper for linear distance, and angle was calculated using the law of cosines. Each head was scanned six times using two systems: a dual-structured light facial scanner (iTom) and a stereophotogrammetry system (3dMD). Digital measurements were analysed using Meshlab and Blender for distances and angles, respectively. Trueness values were determined by comparing measurements to reference measurements, while precision values were derived from the variability among the six scans. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis test due to nonhomogeneous variances, followed by Bonferroni correction for pairwise group comparisons.
resultsFor each scanning system, overall deviations in trueness and precision significantly increased with head circumference. Five of the seven distances and one angle showed significant compromises in trueness with larger head circumferences. Most measurements exhibited significant precision decreasing due to head circumference changes, except for N-Pn and Pn-Sn. Additionally, 3dMD displayed higher overall trueness compared to iTom, with five out of seven linear measurements and one angular measurement showing better results.
conclusionHead circumference significantly affects both trueness and precision of 3D facial scans for both technologies, suggesting that facial imaging should be used with caution for larger faces. Selecting an appropriate scanning system, such as 3dMD, can help mitigate the negative effects of scanning larger objects.
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.