ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2025
Innovative Protocol for Consistent Facial Photography in Aesthetic Surgery: A Cost-Effective Solution.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 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.
- Hyaluronic Acid vs Poly-L-Lactic Acid for the Treatment of Upper-Eyelid Hollowing: A Prospective Cohort Study.Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Standardized facial photography is critical in plastic surgery and medical aesthetics to ensure consistent preoperative and postoperative documentation. Current methods face challenges in maintaining uniformity because of patient variability, equipment limitations, and environmental inconsistencies. The authors of this study introduce a cost-effective photographic method validated through machine learning techniques to achieve reproducibility and precision in head positioning. Objectives: The primary objective was to develop and validate a standardized photographic system that minimizes angular deviations across 3 axes (yaw, pitch, and roll). The hypothesis was that this method would achieve high reproducibility and consistency across different photographers and time points. Methods: Participants were photographed in 5 standard positions (frontal, right lateral, left lateral, right 45° oblique, and left 45° oblique). A specialized setup, including a rotational chair and fixed lighting, was used. Images were analyzed using a pretrained machine learning model to quantify head angles. Statistical analyses included Shapiro-Wilk tests for normality and Hotelling's Results: A prospective study was conducted with 20 participants (18 females, 2 males; mean age 31 years). The mean differences between measured and theoretical yaw angles were within ±2° across all positions. Pitch and roll values remained close to zero, indicating minimal vertical or lateral deviations. Hotelling's Conclusions: The authors of this study present a simple, reliable photographic method for consistent facial imaging in clinical practice. The integration of machine learning enhances accuracy and validates the approach. This method meets the high standards of standardization required for medical imaging and is particularly suitable for resource-limited settings. Level of Evidence 5 Therapeutic:
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.