ArticleScientific reports2025
Deep learning-based automatic facial symmetry scoring in peripheral facial palsy.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- A 2D Photo Score for Phenotypic Severity in Unilateral Coronal Synostosis Patients.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2026Article
- AI-Based Angle Map Analysis of Facial Asymmetry in Peripheral Facial Palsy.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Objective Dynamic Assessment of Facial Movement Asymmetry in Children Using a Marker-Based Video Method.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
Unilateral peripheral facial palsy (PFP) results in facial asymmetry and functional impairment, reducing quality of life. Accurate, objective assessment is vital for monitoring and rehabilitation. This study presents an automated method utilizes standardized 2D photographs to visualize facial dynamics using heatmaps and calculates an objective symmetry score, quantifying movement symmetry. Retrospective analysis included 405 facial datasets from 198 PFP patients. Images were processed using a deep learning-based facial landmark detection and an affine alignment algorithm. Heatmaps were generated from grayscale difference images, and symmetry scores calculated by comparing mirrored facial halves within a defined mask. Stennert movement scores were correlated with symmetry scores using Spearman's rank correlation. The method was applied successfully to all datasets, with symmetry scores ranging from 0 to 0.99 (mean 0.85 ± 0.12), varying by expression level. Heatmaps highlighted asymmetries matching clinical findings. In 85% of cases, Stennert trends aligned with symmetry scores; 9% showed stable Stennert scores but changing symmetry scores, suggesting higher sensitivity. Significant negative correlations (r = - 0.32 to - 0.66, p < 0.0001) confirmed greater clinical severity corresponds to lower symmetry scores. In conclusion, the automated method provides an objective, reliable, and accessible tool for assessing facial symmetry in PFP, thereby improving clinical evaluation and facilitating precise rehabilitation monitoring.
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.