ArticleAesthetic surgery journal. Open forum2026
Reliability of a Portable Nonfixed Stereophotogrammetry System for Facial Imaging.
Article in Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum, 2026. 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.
- A Comprehensive Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes in Poly-L-Lactic Acid Treatments-A Randomized, Interventional, and Comparative Clinical Study.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Trial
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
Stereophotogrammetry (3D-SQ) provides a precise alternative for the assessment of facial aesthetic procedures. Nevertheless, its accuracy could be influenced by the operator when a nonfixed device is used. The objective of the present observational study was to evaluate the reliability of a portable nonfixed 3D-SQ device. Three operators took two 3-dimensional (3D) image captures of 3 distinct volunteers using a portable nonfixed 3D-SQ device. The acquisition of images was performed at 2 different time points (F1 and F2) with a 60 min interval between each capture for each volunteer. No external lights or tripod were utilized, as recommended by the manufacturer. The photographs were processed through specialized software to generate 3D models, and a specific region of the face was analyzed to assess the reliability of the method. Interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of the area, perimeter, and volume of the selected region were calculated. The results demonstrated a high intraoperator consistency at all 3 obtained values (volume ICCs = 0.829; area ICCs = 0.828; perimeter ICCs = 0.673). However, a low reliability in all values across different operators was found (ICCs < 0.5). These results suggest that variations in the captures may differ among different operators. These results may be attributed to factors such as the operator height, differences in reference points, or equipment stability. The study concluded that the reliability in facial stereophotogrammetry using a nonfixed device can be influenced by the operator, exhibiting high intraoperator reliability but significant variations between different operators.
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.