ArticleAesthetic plastic surgery2026
Application of Laser Level in Standardized Facial Medical Photography.
Article in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandardized clinical photography is crucial for diagnosis, documentation, and research. However, existing protocols often rely on expensive equipment or operator skill, limiting adoption in resource-limited settings.
methodsWe developed a laser-level-assisted protocol for standardized facial photography using a smartphone. A total of 100 patients were photographed using both conventional and laser-level-assisted methods by two attending physicians. Three standard views were captured. Subjective image quality was evaluated using a modified 5-point Likert scale, and objective assessment was performed using ImageJ-based measurements. Statistical comparisons were conducted using linear mixed-effects models to account for within-subject clustering across methods, operators, and views.
resultsMixed-effects models showed that laser-level-assisted photography required less acquisition time than conventional photography (estimated mean difference = -4.06 s, 95% CI -4.71 to -3.44; P < 0.001) and achieved higher subjective scores (estimated mean difference = +0.64 points, 95% CI +0.60 to +0.68; P < 0.001) and objective scores (estimated mean difference = +1.52 points, 95% CI +1.25 to +1.79; P < 0.001). Inter-rater reliability for subjective scoring was excellent (ICC = 0.93). The laser-level-assisted workflow also showed minimal operator-related variation compared with conventional acquisition.
conclusionsLaser-level-assisted smartphone photography provides a reproducible, cost-effective, and operator-independent approach for standardized facial medical imaging. This scalable method may facilitate clinical documentation, training, and mobile healthcare, particularly in resource-constrained settings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
41820613What 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.