Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
100
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Methods to Quantify Soft-Tissue Based Facial Growth and Treatment Outcomes in Children: A Systematic Review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Context

          Technological advancements have led craniofacial researchers and clinicians into the era of three-dimensional digital imaging for quantitative evaluation of craniofacial growth and treatment outcomes.

          Objective

          To give an overview of soft-tissue based methods for quantitative longitudinal assessment of facial dimensions in children until six years of age and to assess the reliability of these methods in studies with good methodological quality.

          Data Source

          PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL were searched. A hand search was performed to check for additional relevant studies.

          Study Selection

          Primary publications on facial growth and treatment outcomes in children younger than six years of age were included.

          Data Extraction

          Independent data extraction by two observers. A quality assessment instrument was used to determine the methodological quality. Methods, used in studies with good methodological quality, were assessed for reliability expressed as the magnitude of the measurement error and the correlation coefficient between repeated measurements.

          Results

          In total, 47 studies were included describing 4 methods: 2D x-ray cephalometry; 2D photography; anthropometry; 3D imaging techniques (surface laser scanning, stereophotogrammetry and cone beam computed tomography). In general the measurement error was below 1 mm and 1° and correlation coefficients range from 0.65 to 1.0.

          Conclusion

          Various methods have shown to be reliable. However, at present stereophotogrammetry seems to be the best 3D method for quantitative longitudinal assessment of facial dimensions in children until six years of age due to its millisecond fast image capture, archival capabilities, high resolution and no exposure to ionizing radiation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the Jadad scale.

          An instrument was developed and validated by Jadad, et al. to assess the quality of clinical trials using studies from the pain literature. Our study determined the reliability of the Jadad scale and the effect of blinding on interrater agreement in another group of primary studies. Four raters independently assessed blinded and unblinded versions of 76 randomized trials. Interrater agreement was calculated among combinations of four raters for blinded and unblinded versions of the studies. A 4 x 2 x 2 repeated measures design was employed to evaluate the effect of blinding. The interrater agreement for the Jadad scale was poor (kappa 0.37 to 0.39), but agreement improved substantially (kappa 0.53 to 0.59) with removal of the third item (an explanation of withdrawals). Blinding did not significantly affect the Jadad scale scores. A more precise description of how to score the withdrawal item and careful conduct of a practice set of articles might improve interrater agreement. In contrast with the conclusions reached by Jadad, we were unable to demonstrate a significant effect of blinding on the quality scores.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed.

            To develop, through revision of the Cochrane Collaboration search strategy for OVID-MEDLINE, a highly sensitive search strategy to retrieve reports of controlled trials using PubMed. The original highly sensitive Cochrane strategy was revised to take into account additional Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and other terminology as well as the current unique features of PubMed. We compared the retrieval of the revised strategy with that of the original Cochrane strategy before and after translation of the strategies into PubMed format. Finally, we used a gold standard database of reports of controlled trials identified by electronic and hand search of selected journals to test the revised strategy in PubMed format. The revised strategy included a search statement modified for increased precision, and added 'Cross-over Studies' as a MeSH term and the term 'latin square' as a text word. Compared to the original Cochrane strategy, the revised strategy identified 53 additional reports of controlled trials accessing MEDLINE through OVID. When the revised strategy and original Cochrane strategy were translated into PubMed format, the revised strategy retrieved 90 reports of controlled trials not identified by the original strategy. Finally, the revised strategy in PubMed format retrieved all of the reports of controlled trials in the gold standard database. Ninety-eight per cent of the gold standard reports of controlled trials were retrieved by Phase 1 of the optimal PubMed search strategy. Failure to identify all relevant trials for systematic review could result in bias. We developed a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials for use with PubMed that retrieves more relevant citations (greater sensitivity) and fewer non-relevant citations (greater precision) than the original Cochrane search strategy.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validity and reliability of craniofacial anthropometric measurement of 3D digital photogrammetric images.

              Direct anthropometry performed during a patient examination is the standard technique for quantifying craniofacial dysmorphology, as well as for surgical planning and outcome assessment. Several new technologies have been designed to computerize anthropometric measurements, including three-dimensional (3D) digital photogrammetry. These digital systems have the advantage of acquiring patient craniofacial surface images quickly and noninvasively. Before morphometry using digital photogrammetry can be applied in clinical and research practice, it must be assessed against direct anthropometry. To evaluate the validity and reliability of facial anthropometric linear distances imaged by 3D digital photogrammetry with respect to direct anthropometry. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, MEASURES: Standard craniofacial distances were directly measured twice on 20 normal adult volunteers. Craniofacial surfaces were also imaged using the 3dMDface digital photogrammetry system, and distances were digitally measured twice for each subject. Validity measures of accuracy and bias (for direct versus digital measurements) and reproducibility measures of precision and test-retest reliability (for repeated sets of digital measurements) were computed. Seventeen of the 18 direct measurements correlated highly with digital values (mean r = 0.88). The correlation for one measurement (upper prolabial width) was not statistically significant. The overall precision of all 17 digital measurements was less than 1 mm, and the reliability was high (mean r = 0.91). Craniofacial anthropometry using the 3dMDface System is valid and reliable. Digital measurements of upper prolabial width may require direct marking, prior to imaging, to improve landmark identification.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2012
                6 August 2012
                : 7
                : 8
                : e41898
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Orthodontics and Craniofacial Biology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Preventive and Curative Dentistry, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Department of Pediatric Medicine, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [4 ]Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                Children’s Hospital Boston, United States of America
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: SB AK. Performed the experiments: SB MvB. Analyzed the data: SB EB. Wrote the paper: SB. Intellectual evaluation: JD TM SJB.

                Article
                PONE-D-12-05185
                10.1371/journal.pone.0041898
                3412871
                22879898
                32d414e3-eafb-4f4e-a859-18ddb2c1e694
                Copyright @ 2012

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 20 February 2012
                : 28 June 2012
                Page count
                Pages: 10
                Funding
                This work was supported by a grant from the Dutch Technology Foundation to STW (grant no. 10315). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine
                Anatomy and Physiology
                Comparative Anatomy
                Clinical Research Design
                Systematic Reviews
                Oral Medicine
                Dentistry
                Oral Diseases
                Otorhinolaryngology
                Cleft Lip and Palate
                Surgery
                Dermatologic and Cosmetic Surgery
                Pediatric Surgery
                Reconstructive Surgery

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content272

                Cited by21

                Most referenced authors810