Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Auto-eFACE: Machine Learning-Enhanced Program Yields Automated Facial Palsy Assessment Tool.
Miller, Matthew Q; Hadlock, Tessa A; Fortier, Emily; Guarin, Diego L.
Afiliación
  • Miller MQ; From the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School; and the Biomedical Engineering Program, Florida Institute of Technology.
  • Hadlock TA; From the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School; and the Biomedical Engineering Program, Florida Institute of Technology.
  • Fortier E; From the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School; and the Biomedical Engineering Program, Florida Institute of Technology.
  • Guarin DL; From the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Harvard Medical School; and the Biomedical Engineering Program, Florida Institute of Technology.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 147(2): 467-474, 2021 02 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33235050
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Facial palsy assessment is nonstandardized. Clinician-graded scales are limited by subjectivity and observer bias. Computer-aided grading would be desirable to achieve conformity in facial palsy assessment and to compare the effectiveness of treatments. This research compares the clinician-graded eFACE scale to machine learning-derived automated assessments (auto-eFACE).

METHODS:

The Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary Standard Facial Palsy Dataset was employed. Clinician-graded eFACE assessment was performed on 160 photographs. A Python script was used to automatically generate auto-eFACE scores on the same photographs. eFACE and auto-eFACE scores were compared for normal, flaccidly paralyzed, and synkinetic faces.

RESULTS:

Auto-eFACE and eFACE scores differentiated normal faces from those with facial palsy. Auto-eFACE produced significantly lower scores than eFACE for normal faces (93.83 ± 4.37 versus 100.00 ± 1.58; p = 0.01). Review of photographs revealed minor facial asymmetries in normal faces that clinicians tend to disregard. Auto-eFACE reported better facial symmetry in patients with flaccid paralysis (59.96 ± 5.80) and severe synkinesis (62.35 ± 9.35) than clinician-graded eFACE (52.20 ± 3.39 and 54.22 ± 5.35, respectively; p = 0.080 and p = 0.080, respectively); this result trended toward significance.

CONCLUSIONS:

Auto-eFACE scores can be obtained automatically using a freely available machine learning-based computer software. Automated scores predicted more asymmetry in normal patients, and less asymmetry in patients with flaccid palsy and synkinesis, compared to clinician grading. Auto-eFACE is a quick and easy-to-use assessment tool that holds promise for standardization of facial palsy outcome measures and may eliminate observer bias seen in clinician-graded scales. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Diagnostic, III.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Diagnóstico por Computador / Sincinesia / Asimetría Facial / Parálisis Facial / Aprendizaje Automático Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Plast Reconstr Surg Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Diagnóstico por Computador / Sincinesia / Asimetría Facial / Parálisis Facial / Aprendizaje Automático Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Plast Reconstr Surg Año: 2021 Tipo del documento: Article