ReviewForensic science, medicine, and pathology2026
Evolution of facial identification techniques: A bibliometric analysis (1970 - 2022).
Review in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study performed a bibliometric analysis of global research on human facial recognition for forensic purposes, identifying trends in techniques, anatomical regions, and methodological evolution over five decades.
methodsSix databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, BVS, and Lilacs) were searched without language or year restrictions. We included studies focusing on human identification through clinical or imaging facial examinations. Data regarding year, journal, authors, keywords, age group, examination type, and methods (metric, morphological, or volumetric) were extracted. Two independent investigators used Rayyan™ for selection, and descriptive analysis was performed using VantagePoint™ and Excel™.
resultsFrom 5016 identified articles, 424 studies published between 1970 and 2022 were included (four systematic reviews, three clinical, 377 observational, and 40 laboratory studies). Forensic Science International was the leading journal (n = 113), and Stephan CN was the most prolific author. Photography was the most used examination (n = 125). Metric analysis prevailed as the primary method (n = 221). While the total face was the most frequent focus (n = 239), the nose emerged as the most studied isolated region (n = 20). Most studies (n = 415) reported identification results.
conclusionFacial identification research has grown significantly, with photography and metric methods remaining the current standards. However, bibliometric trends point toward a paradigm shift: the integration of Artificial Intelligence and 3D volumetric analysis is emerging as a critical frontier to overcome the limitations of conventional 2D techniques, offering superior precision and optimized forensic workflows.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42498911What 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.