Cargando…
A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology
OBJECTIVES: Currently, two & three-dimensional (2D & 3D) imaging techniques have largely replaced the direct anthropometric method in the assessment of facial morphology, but the difference between the two techniques was not quantified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare and qua...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6579906/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31338446 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01880 |
_version_ | 1783427929457295360 |
---|---|
author | Anas, IY Bamgbose, BO Nuhu, Saleh |
author_facet | Anas, IY Bamgbose, BO Nuhu, Saleh |
author_sort | Anas, IY |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: Currently, two & three-dimensional (2D & 3D) imaging techniques have largely replaced the direct anthropometric method in the assessment of facial morphology, but the difference between the two techniques was not quantified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare and quantify (the difference between) the two techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The faces of 150 subjects (75 males, 75 females) of northern Nigeria, predominantly Hausa ethnic group, were photographed (using digital camera) and scanned (using a 3D surface laser scanner). Facial dimensions were generated from the resulting virtual 2D and 3D models. Data were analyzed using R-statistic software & Paired sample t-test/Pearson correlation were conducted to compare the two methods and to quantify the level of closeness between the two measurements. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was very low (0.26) for the 3D and 2D measurements indicating the level of differences between the methods. Measurements taken with laser scanner were higher relative to the one taken by camera. The mean differences between the 3D and the 2D methods of quantifying facial morphology indicated a statistically significant positive difference. CONCLUSION: 2D and 3D anthropometry cannot be used interchangeably since there exists statistically significant variation between the two methods. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6579906 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65799062019-07-23 A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology Anas, IY Bamgbose, BO Nuhu, Saleh Heliyon Article OBJECTIVES: Currently, two & three-dimensional (2D & 3D) imaging techniques have largely replaced the direct anthropometric method in the assessment of facial morphology, but the difference between the two techniques was not quantified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare and quantify (the difference between) the two techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The faces of 150 subjects (75 males, 75 females) of northern Nigeria, predominantly Hausa ethnic group, were photographed (using digital camera) and scanned (using a 3D surface laser scanner). Facial dimensions were generated from the resulting virtual 2D and 3D models. Data were analyzed using R-statistic software & Paired sample t-test/Pearson correlation were conducted to compare the two methods and to quantify the level of closeness between the two measurements. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was very low (0.26) for the 3D and 2D measurements indicating the level of differences between the methods. Measurements taken with laser scanner were higher relative to the one taken by camera. The mean differences between the 3D and the 2D methods of quantifying facial morphology indicated a statistically significant positive difference. CONCLUSION: 2D and 3D anthropometry cannot be used interchangeably since there exists statistically significant variation between the two methods. Elsevier 2019-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6579906/ /pubmed/31338446 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01880 Text en © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Anas, IY Bamgbose, BO Nuhu, Saleh A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title | A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title_full | A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title_fullStr | A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title_short | A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology |
title_sort | comparison between 2d and 3d methods of quantifying facial morphology |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6579906/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31338446 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01880 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT anasiy acomparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology AT bamgbosebo acomparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology AT nuhusaleh acomparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology AT anasiy comparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology AT bamgbosebo comparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology AT nuhusaleh comparisonbetween2dand3dmethodsofquantifyingfacialmorphology |