Commentary on: Eye-Tracking Technology in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
pp. 1035-1036
Author(s):  
Jacob B Hammond
2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
pp. 1022-1034
Author(s):  
Malke Asaad ◽  
Jacob K Dey ◽  
Ahmad Al-Mouakeh ◽  
Mohamad Baraa Manjouna ◽  
Mohammad A Nashed ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The use of eye-tracking technology in plastic surgery has gained popularity over the past decade due to its ability to assess observers’ visual preferences in an objective manner. Objectives The goal of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of eye-tracking studies in plastic and reconstructive surgery, which can aid in the design and conduct of high-quality eye-tracking studies. Methods Through application of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search of articles published on eye-tracking across several databases was conducted from January 1946 to January 2019. Inclusion criteria included studies evaluating the use of eye-tracking technology in the field of plastic and reconstructive surgery. The resulting publications were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Results A total of 595 articles were identified, 23 of which met our inclusion criteria. The most common application of eye-tracking was to assess individuals with cleft lip/palate (9 studies). All 19 studies that evaluated fixation patterns among conditions vs controls reported significant differences between the 2 groups. Five out of 7 studies assessing visual data between preoperative and postoperative patients identified significant differences between the preoperative and postoperative groups, whereas 2 studies did not. Nine studies examined the relation between severity indices, attractiveness scores, or personality ratings and gaze patterns. Correlation was found in 7 out of the 9 studies. Conclusions This systematic review demonstrates the utility of eye-tracking technology as a quantifiable objective assessment and emerging research tool for evaluating outcomes in several domains of plastic and reconstructive surgery.


2017 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hajra Ashraf ◽  
Mikael H. Sodergren ◽  
Nabeel Merali ◽  
George Mylonas ◽  
Harsimrat Singh ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 701-712
Author(s):  
Christian Tapking ◽  
Alexis L. Boson ◽  
Victoria G. Rontoyanni ◽  
Karl F. Kowalewski ◽  
Gabriel Hundeshagen ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 736-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna S. Vyas ◽  
H. Rhodes Hambrick ◽  
Afaaf Shakir ◽  
Shane D. Morrison ◽  
Duy C. Tran ◽  
...  

JPRAS Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Nehme ◽  
Jonathan James Neville ◽  
Ali Nehme Bahsoun

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (04) ◽  
pp. 285-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weidong Weng ◽  
Feng Zhang ◽  
William Lineaweaver ◽  
Weiyang Gao ◽  
Hede Yan

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 12TR01 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Snegireva ◽  
W Derman ◽  
J Patricios ◽  
K E Welman

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas D. Dobbs ◽  
Olivia Cundy ◽  
Harsh Samarendra ◽  
Khurram Khan ◽  
Iain Stuart Whitaker

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (11) ◽  
pp. 2063-2071
Author(s):  
Louis Boyce ◽  
Marios Nicolaides ◽  
John Gerrard Hanrahan ◽  
Michail Sideris ◽  
Georgios Pafitanis

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document