ArticleBMC medical education2026
Facial soft-tissue analysis in undergraduate dental education: comparison of 2D photographs and images derived from 3D facial scans.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTwo-dimensional (2D) photographs are routinely used for teaching facial soft-tissue analysis, whereas three-dimensional (3D) facial scans are increasingly used in clinical orthodontics. This prospective educational study evaluated diagnostic agreement when dental students assessed standardized orthodontic soft-tissue parameters using 2D photographs and 3D facial scan-derived images.
methods93 dental students (7th, 9th, and 10th semesters) performed standardized soft-tissue analyses using 2D photographs, 3D color facial scans, and 3D grayscale facial scans. Paired images from 20 orthodontic patients were presented in standardized printed formats. Assessments were conducted sequentially at three time points one week apart (2D, 3D color, 3D grayscale). A consensus reference standard established by orthodontic experts served as the gold standard. Agreement was assessed using Cohen’s kappa.
results67 students completed the 2D assessment, and 50 students completed each 3D assessment. Agreement for objective parameters was highest for 2D photographs and lowest for 3D grayscale images. Compared with 2D images, agreement decreased for most objective parameters with 3D color scans and further decreased for 3D grayscale images. Facial thirds showed a stepwise reduction in agreement across modalities. Profile classification according to A.M. Schwarz showed the highest agreement with 3D color scans. Higher-semester students achieved greater agreement for most objective parameters, whereas agreement for subjective variables was highest for 2D images.
conclusionStandardized 2D orthodontic soft-tissue analysis can be transferred to facial scan-derived images with limitations. Color facial scans provide more reliable diagnostic conditions than grayscale scans, and diagnostic agreement improves with educational experience, supporting integration of 3D imaging into undergraduate orthodontic training.
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.