Dataset Information

3D stereophotogrammetry versus traditional craniofacial anthropometry: Comparing measurements from the 3D facial norms database to Farkas's North American norms.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Datasets of soft-tissue craniofacial anthropometric norms collected with the use of different methods are available, but there is little understanding of how the measurements compare. Here we compare a set of standard facial measurements between 2 large datasets: the 3D Facial Norms (3DFN) dataset collected with the use of 3D stereophotogrammetry (n = 2454), and the Farkas craniofacial norms collected with the use of direct anthropometry (n = 2326). METHODS:A common set of 24 craniofacial linear distances were compared by computing standardized effect sizes (Cohen d) for each measurement to describe the overall direction and magnitude of the difference between the 2 datasets. RESULTS:Variables with higher mean d values (suggesting greater discrepancy across datasets) included measurements involving the ear landmark tragion, the landmark nasion, the width of nasolabial structures, the vermilion portion of the lips, and palpebral fissure length. Variables with lower mean d values included smaller midline measurements involving the lips and lower face and horizontal distance measures between the eyes. Eight measurements showed a significant negative correlation (P < 0.05) between Cohen d and age, indicating greater similarity across the 2 datasets as age increased. CONCLUSIONS:There are considerable differences between the 3DFN and Farkas norms. In addition to the measurement methods, other factors accounting for discrepancies may include secular trends in craniofacial morphology or differences in ethnic composition.

SUBMITTER: Weinberg SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6571015 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

3D stereophotogrammetry versus traditional craniofacial anthropometry: Comparing measurements from the 3D facial norms database to Farkas's North American norms.

Weinberg Seth M SM

American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 20190501 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>Datasets of soft-tissue craniofacial anthropometric norms collected with the use of different methods are available, but there is little understanding of how the measurements compare. Here we compare a set of standard facial measurements between 2 large datasets: the 3D Facial Norms (3DFN) dataset collected with the use of 3D stereophotogrammetry (n = 2454), and the Farkas craniofacial norms collected with the use of direct anthropometry (n = 2326).<h4>Methods</h4>A common s ...[more]

PMID: 31053285

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:In 2016, WHO reported a death rate of 303,000 newborns before 4?weeks of age due to congenital anomalies. Those that survive congenital anomalies may have long-term disabilities which may have significant impacts on the individual, their families, the healthcare system, and societies. Tessier craniofacial clefts numbers 3 and 4 are congenital anomalies that result in a partial or total defect of craniofacial tissues thereby seriously influencing the patient's appearance and impair normal functioning. Therefore, understanding these defects is paramount to relieving the burden caused by this disability. The objective of this review was to examine the literature on the understanding of the knowledge of morphology and anthropometry of Tessier craniofacial clefts numbers 3 and 4 so that areas yet to be fully understood by research can be mapped out for future research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A scoping review for literature on patients who have Tessier craniofacial clefts numbers 3 and 4 was conducted. Relevant studies from 1976 to the present were identified. The following databases were searched for peer-reviewed literature viz., PubMed, MEDLINE, EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane library. The study selection was guided by the eligibility criteria. A data table was designed to extract information from the literature. The result of this study was reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT). RESULT:Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of the studies included were conducted in middle-income countries (54.5%) and some in high-income countries (45.5%); none was recorded from low-income countries. The total available sample size from the studies was 120 with a dominant male population of 67 (55.8%) and female 53 (44.2%). The majority (97%) of the studies reported on the knowledge of morphology while 12.1% of the included studies reported on anthropometry. Of the 33 included studies, 32 scored the highest quality (76-100%) from the quality assessment. DISCUSSION:The findings from this review show evidence of the knowledge of morphology and the knowledge of anthropometry of Tessier craniofacial clefts numbers 3 and 4. However, these knowledges have not translated to universally recognized ways of repairing and documenting these clefts due to the sparse amount of studies on Tessier craniofacial clefts numbers 3 and 4.

Dataset Information

3D stereophotogrammetry versus traditional craniofacial anthropometry: Comparing measurements from the 3D facial norms database to Farkas's North American norms.

Publications

3D stereophotogrammetry versus traditional craniofacial anthropometry: Comparing measurements from the 3D facial norms database to Farkas's North American norms.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets