单机和多机三维摄影测量与直接人体测量的精度和准确度评估比较。

Sable Staller, Justina Anigbo, Kelton Stewart, Vinicius Dutra, Hakan Turkkahraman
{"title":"单机和多机三维摄影测量与直接人体测量的精度和准确度评估比较。","authors":"Sable Staller, Justina Anigbo, Kelton Stewart, Vinicius Dutra, Hakan Turkkahraman","doi":"10.2319/101321-770.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the precision and accuracy of single-camera photogrammetry (SCP) and multicamera photogrammetry (MCP) compared with direct anthropometry (DA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 30 participants were recruited, and 17 soft tissue landmarks were identified and used to complete a total of 16 measurements. Using SCP and MCP, two three-dimensional (3D) images were acquired from each participant. All 3D measurements and direct measurements were measured twice by the same operator to assess intraexaminer repeatability. Intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were used to evaluate intraexaminer repeatability and interexaminer agreement of the methods. Nonparametric bootstrap analyses were used to compare the means of the measurements among the three methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All three methods showed excellent intraexaminer repeatability (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Both SCP and MCP showed excellent interexaminer agreement (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.79), left gonion-pogonion (ICC = 0.74), and columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Overall, there was good agreement between methods, except for columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.40) between SCP and MCP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both SCP and MCP techniques were found to be reliable and valid options for 3D facial imaging. SCP produced slightly larger mean values for several measurements, but the differences were within a clinically acceptable range. Because of the larger margin of errors, measurements including the gonial area and subnasale should be assessed with caution.</p>","PeriodicalId":94224,"journal":{"name":"The Angle orthodontist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9374348/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Precision and accuracy assessment of single and multicamera three-dimensional photogrammetry compared with direct anthropometry.\",\"authors\":\"Sable Staller, Justina Anigbo, Kelton Stewart, Vinicius Dutra, Hakan Turkkahraman\",\"doi\":\"10.2319/101321-770.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the precision and accuracy of single-camera photogrammetry (SCP) and multicamera photogrammetry (MCP) compared with direct anthropometry (DA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 30 participants were recruited, and 17 soft tissue landmarks were identified and used to complete a total of 16 measurements. Using SCP and MCP, two three-dimensional (3D) images were acquired from each participant. All 3D measurements and direct measurements were measured twice by the same operator to assess intraexaminer repeatability. Intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were used to evaluate intraexaminer repeatability and interexaminer agreement of the methods. Nonparametric bootstrap analyses were used to compare the means of the measurements among the three methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All three methods showed excellent intraexaminer repeatability (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Both SCP and MCP showed excellent interexaminer agreement (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.79), left gonion-pogonion (ICC = 0.74), and columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Overall, there was good agreement between methods, except for columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.40) between SCP and MCP.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both SCP and MCP techniques were found to be reliable and valid options for 3D facial imaging. SCP produced slightly larger mean values for several measurements, but the differences were within a clinically acceptable range. Because of the larger margin of errors, measurements including the gonial area and subnasale should be assessed with caution.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94224,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9374348/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Angle orthodontist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2319/101321-770.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Angle orthodontist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2319/101321-770.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估单相机摄影测量法(SCP)和多相机摄影测量法(MCP)与直接人体测量法(DA)相比的精确度和准确性:共招募了 30 名参与者,确定了 17 个软组织地标,并利用这些地标完成了总共 16 次测量。使用 SCP 和 MCP,为每位参与者采集了两幅三维图像。所有三维测量和直接测量均由同一操作者测量两次,以评估检查者内部的重复性。类内系数(ICC)用于评估检查方法的检查者内重复性和检查者间一致性。使用非参数引导分析比较三种方法的测量平均值:除 SCP 测量的瞳间距(ICC = 0.86)外,其他三种方法均显示出极佳的检查者内部重复性(ICC > 0.90)。SCP和MCP均显示出极佳的检查者间一致性(ICCs > 0.90),但SCP测量的瞳孔间距(ICC = 0.79)、左腮-腮(ICC = 0.74)和结肠-鼻下-唇上角(ICC = 0.86)除外。总体而言,除了 SCP 和 MCP 测量的结肠-鼻下-唇上角(ICC = 0.40)外,其他方法之间的一致性良好:结论:SCP 和 MCP 技术都是可靠有效的三维面部成像方法。SCP 在几项测量中产生的平均值稍大,但差异在临床可接受的范围内。由于误差范围较大,包括腮腺区域和鼻下的测量应谨慎评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Precision and accuracy assessment of single and multicamera three-dimensional photogrammetry compared with direct anthropometry.

Objectives: To assess the precision and accuracy of single-camera photogrammetry (SCP) and multicamera photogrammetry (MCP) compared with direct anthropometry (DA).

Materials and methods: A total of 30 participants were recruited, and 17 soft tissue landmarks were identified and used to complete a total of 16 measurements. Using SCP and MCP, two three-dimensional (3D) images were acquired from each participant. All 3D measurements and direct measurements were measured twice by the same operator to assess intraexaminer repeatability. Intraclass coefficients (ICCs) were used to evaluate intraexaminer repeatability and interexaminer agreement of the methods. Nonparametric bootstrap analyses were used to compare the means of the measurements among the three methods.

Results: All three methods showed excellent intraexaminer repeatability (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Both SCP and MCP showed excellent interexaminer agreement (ICCs > 0.90), except interpupillary distance (ICC = 0.79), left gonion-pogonion (ICC = 0.74), and columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.86) measured by SCP. Overall, there was good agreement between methods, except for columella-subnasale-labrale superior angle (ICC = 0.40) between SCP and MCP.

Conclusions: Both SCP and MCP techniques were found to be reliable and valid options for 3D facial imaging. SCP produced slightly larger mean values for several measurements, but the differences were within a clinically acceptable range. Because of the larger margin of errors, measurements including the gonial area and subnasale should be assessed with caution.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信