| Title |
Facial asymmetry assessment in adults using three-dimensional surface imaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Progress in Orthodontics, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40510-015-0106-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arti Patel, Syed Mohammed Shamsul Islam, Kevin Murray, Mithran S. Goonewardene |
| Abstract |
The use of three-dimensional (3D) surface imaging is becoming more popular and accepted in the fields of Medicine and Dentistry. The present study aims to develop a technique to automatically localise and quantify soft-tissue asymmetry in adults using 3D facial scans. This may be applied as a diagnostic tool to monitor growth and dynamic changes and to evaluate treatment outcomes. 3D facial surface data were captured from 55 adults comprising 28 symmetrical faces and 27 asymmetrical faces using a 3dMDface system. A landmark-independent method, which compared the original and the mirrored 3D facial data, was developed to quantify the asymmetry. A Weibull distribution-based probabilistic model was generated from the root-mean-square (RMS) error data for the symmetrical group to designate a level of asymmetry which represented a normal range. Statistically significant (p < 0.0001) differences in the RMS error values were found when comparing symmetrical with asymmetrical groups and a similarly significant difference was identified between the lower and the upper face of the asymmetrical group. The proposed 3D imaging-based method of identifying and quantifying facial soft-tissue asymmetry was fast and effective. The Weibull distribution-based comparison of a person's asymmetry with respect to a large sample of symmetrical faces may also be used to evaluate growth, soft-tissue compensations and surgical outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 50% |
| South Africa | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 106 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 27 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 58 | 55% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Unknown | 32 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#81
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,173
of 294,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 294,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.