ArticleEuropean journal of orthodontics2025
The accuracy of automated facial landmarking - a comparative study between Cliniface software and patch-based Convoluted Neural Network algorithm.
Article in European journal of orthodontics, 2025. 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.
- Clinical Equivalence of a CNN-Based Automated Soft Tissue Landmark Detection System on 2D Facial Images.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Review
- Camera-Based Monocular Depth Estimation in Orthodontics: Vision Transformer vs. CNN Model Performance.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
backgroundAutomatic landmarking software packages simplify the analysis of the 3D facial images. Their main deficiency is the limited accuracy of detecting landmarks for routine clinical applications. Cliniface is readily available open-access software for automatic facial landmarking, its validity has not been fully investigated.
objectivesEvaluate the accuracy of Cliniface software in comparison with the developed patch-based Convoluted Neural Network (CNN) algorithm in identifying facial landmarks. MATERIALS /
methodsThe study was carried out on 30 3D photographic images; twenty anatomical facial landmarks were used for the analysis. The manual digitization of the landmarks was repeated twice by an expert operator, which considered the ground truth for the analysis. Each 3D facial image was imported into Cliniface software, and the landmarks were detected automatically. The same set of the facial landmarks were automatically detected using the developed patch-based CNN algorithm. The 3D image of the face was subdivided into multiple patches, the trained CNN algorithm detected the landmarks within each patch. Partial Procrustes Analysis was applied to assess the accuracy of automated landmarking. The method allowed the measurement of the Euclidean distances between the manually detected landmarks and the corresponding ones generated by each of the two automated methods. The significance level was set at 0.05 for the differences between the measured distances.
resultsThe overall landmark localization error of Cliniface software was 3.66 ± 1.53 mm, Subalar exhibiting the largest discrepancy of more than 8 mm in comparison with the manual digitization. Stomion demonstrated the smallest error. The patch-based CNN algorithm was more accurate than Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks, it reached the same level of the manual precision in identifying the same points. The inaccuracy of Cliniface software in detecting the facial landmarks was significantly higher than the manual landmarking precision. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited to one centre, one groups of 3D images, and one operator.
conclusionsThe patch-based CNN algorithm provided a satisfactory accuracy of automatic landmarks detection which is satisfactory for the clinical evaluation of the 3D facial images. Cliniface software is limited in its accuracy in detecting certain landmark which bounds its clinical application.
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.