A comparison between 2D and 3D methods of quantifying facial morphology

被引:21
|
作者
Anas, I. Y. [1 ]
Bamgbose, B. O. [2 ,3 ]
Nuhu, Saleh [4 ]
机构
[1] Bayero Univ, Coll Hlth Sci, Fac Basic Med Sci, Dept Anat, Kano, Nigeria
[2] Bayero Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Oral Diagnost Sci, Kano, Nigeria
[3] Aminu Kano Teaching Hosp, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Radiol, Kano, Nigeria
[4] Northwest Univ, Fac Basic Med Sci, Dept Human Anat, Kano, Kano State, Nigeria
关键词
Anatomy; Health profession; Comparison; Facial morphology; 2D; 3D; Methods; CEPHALOMETRIC MEASUREMENTS; ASYMMETRY; CLASSIFICATION; ACCURACY; GROWTH; FACES; NOSE;
D O I
10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01880
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 2D and 3D analysis methods of facial asymmetry in comparison
    Berssenbruegge, Philipp
    Berlin, Nina Franka
    Kebeck, Guenther
    Runte, Christoph
    Jung, Susanne
    Kleinheinz, Johannes
    Dirksen, Dieter
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2014, 42 (06) : E327 - E334
  • [2] Comparison of Manual (2D) and Digital (3D) Methods in the Assessment of Simulated Facial Edema
    Dallazen, Eduardo
    Baccaro, Gabriela Cristina
    Santos, Anderson Maikon de Souza
    Queiroz, Mariana Elias
    Santiago Junior, Joel Ferreira
    Hochuli-Vieira, Eduardo
    Faverani, Leonardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2023, 81 (09) : 1146 - 1154
  • [3] Quantifying facial expression abnormality in schizophrenia by combining 2D and 3D features
    Wang, Peng
    Kohler, Christian
    Barrett, Fred
    Gur, Raquel
    Gur, Ruben
    Verma, Ragini
    [J]. 2007 IEEE CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER VISION AND PATTERN RECOGNITION, VOLS 1-8, 2007, : 701 - +
  • [4] Accuracy Comparison of Roadway Earthwork Computation between 3D and 2D Methods
    Cheng, Jian-chuan
    Jiang, Long-jian
    [J]. INTELLIGENT AND INTEGRATED SUSTAINABLE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS PROCEEDINGS FROM THE 13TH COTA INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF TRANSPORTATION PROFESSIONALS (CICTP2013), 2013, 96 : 1277 - 1285
  • [5] Comparison between 3D and 2D Cephalometric Analyses
    Bholsithi, W.
    Sinthanayothin, C.
    Chintakanon, K.
    Komolpis, R.
    Tharanon, W.
    [J]. 4TH KUALA LUMPUR INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING 2008, VOLS 1 AND 2, 2008, 21 (1-2): : 540 - +
  • [6] Method Comparison of 3D Facial Reconstruction Coresponding to 2D Image
    Tjahyaningtijas, H. P. A.
    Puspitasari, P.
    Yamasari, Y.
    Anifah, L.
    Buditjahyanto, I. G. P. A.
    [J]. 2ND ANNUAL APPLIED SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING CONFERENCE (AASEC 2017), 2018, 288
  • [7] 2D/3D image (facial) comparison using camera matching
    Goos, Mirelle I. M.
    Alberink, Ivo B.
    Ruifrok, Arnout C. C.
    [J]. FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 163 (1-2) : 10 - 17
  • [8] Usability Comparison between 2D and 3D Control Methods for the Operation of Hovering Objects
    Lee, Daeseong
    Kim, Hajun
    Yoon, Heesoo
    Lee, Wonsup
    [J]. DRONES, 2023, 7 (08)
  • [9] 2D/3D facial feature extraction
    Akakin, Hatice Cmar
    Salah, Albert Ali
    Akarun, Lale
    Sankur, Bulent
    [J]. IMAGE PROCESSING: ALGORITHMS AND SYSTEMS, NEURAL NETWORKS, AND MACHINE LEARNING, 2006, 6064
  • [10] Registration Using Nanotube Stationary Tomosynthesis: Comparison of 3D/3D to 3D/2D Methods
    Frederick, B.
    Lalush, D.
    Chang, S.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (06)