MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982242374 · doi:10.1089/fpsam.2019.29000.gua

Toward an Automatic System for Computer-Aided Assessment in Facial Palsy

2020· article· en· W2982242374 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFacial Plastic Surgery & Aesthetic Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFacial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of TorontoToronto Rehabilitation Institute
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsLandmarkActive appearance modelPalsyFacial expressionPattern recognition (psychology)PopulationTranslation (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Quantitative assessment of facial function is challenging, and subjective grading scales such as House–Brackmann, Sunnybrook, and eFACE have well-recognized limitations. Machine learning (ML) approaches to facial landmark localization carry great clinical potential as they enable high-throughput automated quantification of relevant facial metrics from photographs and videos. However, the translation from research settings to clinical application still requires important improvements. Objective: To develop a novel ML algorithm for fast and accurate localization of facial landmarks in photographs of facial palsy patients and utilize this technology as part of an automated computer-aided diagnosis system. Design, Setting, and Participants: Portrait photographs of 8 expressions obtained from 200 facial palsy patients and 10 healthy participants were manually annotated by localizing 68 facial landmarks in each photograph and by 3 trained clinicians using a custom graphical user interface. A novel ML model for automated facial landmark localization was trained using this disease-specific database. Algorithm accuracy was compared with manual markings and the output of a model trained using a larger database consisting only of healthy subjects. Main Outcomes and Measurements: Root mean square error normalized by the interocular distance (NRMSE) of facial landmark localization between prediction of ML algorithm and manually localized landmarks. Results: Publicly available algorithms for facial landmark localization provide poor localization accuracy when applied to photographs of patients compared with photographs of healthy controls (NRMSE, 8.56 ± 2.16 vs. 7.09 ± 2.34, p ≪ 0.01). We found significant improvement in facial landmark localization accuracy for the facial palsy patient population when using a model trained with a relatively small number photographs (1440) of patients compared with a model trained using several thousand more images of healthy faces (NRMSE, 6.03 ± 2.43 vs. 8.56 ± 2.16, p ≪ 0.01). Conclusions and Relevance: Retraining a computer vision facial landmark detection model with fewer than 1600 annotated images of patients significantly improved landmark detection performance in frontal view photographs of this population. The new annotated database and facial landmark localization model represent the first steps toward an automatic system for computer-aided assessment in facial palsy. Level of Evidence: 4

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.671
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it