Facial Paralysis Measurement with a Handheld Ruler
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluation of the severity of facial paralysis deformity and the effectiveness of reconstructive surgery requires a measurement tool that is practical and simple enough for daily use. It should be able to objectively measure facial asymmetry at rest and the amount of facial movement during expression. The authors present and assess a simple measurement technique that is readily usable in the clinic. Designed to evaluate smile reconstruction, the technique can be used to evaluate other parts of the paralyzed face, such as the eye, nose, and forehead. METHODS: A standardized handheld ruler measuring technique is described for the assessment of the position and the movement of five points marked on the lips. The measured points are used to characterize the position of the mouth at rest and the movement that occurs with smiling. The technique uses two transparent rulers that are held in the examiner's hand. Using this technique, two experienced examiners separately measured the rest position of 21 unilateral facial paralysis patients twice, creating 84 sets of measurements. Accuracy was assessed by simultaneously measuring the movement of the commissure and mid upper lip during smiling on 10 normal persons using both handheld ruler and a proven technique, the facial reanimation measurement system. RESULTS: The average intraclass correlation coefficients for interrater and intrarater reliability exceed 0.89. The mean difference between the handheld ruler and facial reanimation measurement system measurements was 1.7 mm. CONCLUSION: The handheld ruler technique is simple, reliable, and accurate, providing useful measurements for the evaluation of facial paralysis reconstructions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it