Loading…

Automated facial landmark measurement using machine learning: A feasibility study

Information regarding facial landmark measurement using machine learning (ML) techniques in prosthodontics is lacking. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the reliability, validity, and accuracy of facial anthropological measurements using both manual and ML landmark detection te...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of prosthetic dentistry 2024-04
Main Authors: Koseoglu, Merve, Ramachandran, Remya Ampadi, Ozdemir, Hatice, Ariani, Maretaningtias Dwi, Bayindir, Funda, Sukotjo, Cortino
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Information regarding facial landmark measurement using machine learning (ML) techniques in prosthodontics is lacking. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the reliability, validity, and accuracy of facial anthropological measurements using both manual and ML landmark detection techniques. Two-dimensional (2D) frontal full-face photographs of 50 men and 50 women were made. The interpupillary width (IPW), interlateral canthus width (LCW), intermedial canthus width (MCW), interalar width (IAW), and intercommissural width (ICW) were measured on 2D digital images using manual and ML methods. The automated measurements were recorded using a programming language (Python), and a convolutional neural network (CNN) model was trained to detect human facial landmarks. The obtained data from the manual and ML methods were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), the paired sample t test, Bland-Altman plots, and the Pearson correlation analysis (α=.05). Intrarater and interrater reliability values were greater than 0.90, indicating excellent reliability. The mean difference between the manual and ML measurements of IPW, MCW, IAW, and ICW was 0.02 mm, while it was 0.01 mm for LCW. No statistically significant differences were found between the measurements obtained by the manual and ML methods (P>.05). Highly significant positive correlations (P
ISSN:0022-3913
1097-6841
DOI:10.1016/j.prosdent.2024.04.007