↓ Skip to main content

A blind accuracy assessment of computer-modeled forensic facial reconstruction using computed tomography data from live subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, September 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 1,014)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
A blind accuracy assessment of computer-modeled forensic facial reconstruction using computed tomography data from live subjects
Published in
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, September 2006
DOI 10.1007/s12024-006-0007-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Wilkinson, Chris Rynn, Heather Peters, Myke Taister, Chung How Kau, Stephen Richmond

Abstract

A computer modeling system for facial reconstruction has been developed that employs a touch-based application to create anatomically accurate facial models focusing on skeletal detail. This article discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the system and illustrates its accuracy and reliability with a blind study using computed tomography (CT) data of living individuals. Three-dimensional models of the skulls of two white North American adults (one male, one female) were imported into the computer system. Facial reconstructions were produced by two practitioners following the Manchester method. Two posters were produced, each including a face pool of five surface model images and the facial reconstruction. The face pool related to the sex, age, and ethnic group of the target individual and included the surface model image of the target individual. Fifty-two volunteers were asked to choose the face from the face pool that most resembled each reconstruction. Both reconstructions received majority percentage hit rates that were at least 50% greater than any other face in the pool. The combined percentage hit rate was 50% above chance (70%). A quantitative comparison of the facial morphology between the facial reconstructions and the CT scan models of the subjects was carried out using Rapidform(™) 2004 PP2-RF4. The majority of the surfaces of the facial reconstructions showed less than 2.5 mm error and 90% of the male face and 75% of the female face showed less than 5 mm error. Many of the differences between the facial reconstructions and the facial scans were probably the result of positional effects caused during the CT scanning procedure, especially on the female subject who had a fatter face than the male subject. The areas of most facial reconstruction error were at the ears and nasal tip.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 19%
Student > Master 7 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Lecturer 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Arts and Humanities 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2022.
All research outputs
#742,952
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#16
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,072
of 69,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 69,060 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them