Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42032369›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2026

Clusters in craniofacial microsomia and microtia according to facial morphology and craniofacial anomalies.

Elsa M Ronde, Guido A de Jong, Jitske W Nolte, Marloes E L Nienhuijs, Neil W Bulstrode, Thomas J J Maal, Alfred G Becking, Corstiaan C Breugem, 3DCFMM research consortium

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Elsa M RondeDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105AZ, the Netherlands. e.m.ronde@amsterdamumc.nl.
Guido A de JongDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jitske W NolteDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Academic Centre Dentistry Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marloes E L NienhuijsDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Neil W BulstrodeDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Great Ormond Street Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Thomas J J MaalDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Alfred G BeckingDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Academic Centre Dentistry Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Corstiaan C BreugemDepartment of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, 1105AZ, the Netherlands.
3DCFMM research consortium

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Associated craniofacial malformations such as ocular anomalies and macrostomia are frequently seen in craniofacial microsomia (CFM). This study assessed associations between objectively measured facial morphology and clinically observed craniofacial malformations in patients with CFM in order to identify clinically significant patient clusters based on these characteristics for preferential screening purposes. In this multicenter cross-sectional cohort study, facial morphology was assessed from three-dimensional (3D) photographs using asymmetry index (ASI) and facial signature (FS) scores, as well as a principal components (PC) analysis of FS scores. Differences in ASI, FS and PC scores were calculated for patients with and without craniofacial anomalies. A clustering analysis was applied to identify patient clusters based on facial morphology and the presence of craniofacial anomalies. A total of 179 patients were included, and significantly higher ASI and FS scores were found in patients with ocular anomalies, skin adnexa-related anomalies, clefting, inner ear anomalies, speech- and language difficulties and vision difficulties compared to patients without these anomalies or difficulties. Two clusters were identified, with significant differences in PC scores, craniofacial anomalies, as well as speech- and language- and vision difficulties.

conclusionPatients with ocular anomalies, skin adnexa-related anomalies, clefting and aural atresia, or anomalies in two or more of these groups had more facial hypoplasia, while patients with anomalies in two or fewer of these groups had less facial hypoplasia. 3D photography may be a promising tool to identify patients that should be screened for these concurrent craniofacial anomalies. WHAT IS KNOWN: • CFM is a hetergeneous condition and patients may have various craniofacial anomalies. • 3D photography can be used to measure facial shape in patients with CFM. WHAT IS NEW: • Patients with more facial hypoplasia measured using 3D photography frequently have more associated craniofacialanomalies. • 3D photography could be a promising tool for identifying patients who should be preferentially screened forassociated anomalies.

Indexed as

Congenital MicrotiaCraniofacial AbnormalitiesFaceGoldenhar SyndromeAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolCluster AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalInfantMaleAural atresiaCleftingCraniofacial microsomiaOcular anomaliesStereophotogrammetryVelopharyngeal dysfunction

Identifiers

PMID42032369
PMCPMC13109105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.