Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this network meta-analysis is to evaluate the accuracy of various face-scanning technologies in the market, with respect to the different dimensions of space (x, y, and z axes). Furthermore, attention will be paid to the type of technologies currently used and to the best practices for high-quality scan acquisition.
METHODS: The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and its updates. A thorough search was performed using the digital databases MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials by entering research lines or various combinations of free words. The main keywords used during the search process were \"photogrammetry\", \"laser scanner\", \"optical scanner\", \"3D\", and \"face\".
RESULTS: None of the included technologies significantly deviated from direct anthropometry. The obtained mean differences in the distances between the considered landmarks range from 1.10 to -1.74 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: Limiting the movements of the patient and scanner allows for more accurate facial scans with all the technologies involved. Active technologies such as laser scanners (LS), structured light (SL), and infrared structured light (ISL) have accuracy comparable to that of static stereophotogrammetry while being more cost-effective and less time-consuming.
METHODS: The review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and its updates. A thorough search was performed using the digital databases MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials by entering research lines or various combinations of free words. The main keywords used during the search process were \"photogrammetry\", \"laser scanner\", \"optical scanner\", \"3D\", and \"face\".
RESULTS: None of the included technologies significantly deviated from direct anthropometry. The obtained mean differences in the distances between the considered landmarks range from 1.10 to -1.74 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: Limiting the movements of the patient and scanner allows for more accurate facial scans with all the technologies involved. Active technologies such as laser scanners (LS), structured light (SL), and infrared structured light (ISL) have accuracy comparable to that of static stereophotogrammetry while being more cost-effective and less time-consuming.
摘要：
目的：此网络荟萃分析的目的是评估市场上各种面部扫描技术的准确性，关于空间的不同维度(x，y,和z轴）。此外，将注意当前使用的技术类型以及高质量扫描采集的最佳实践。
方法：本综述遵循PRISMA指南及其更新。使用数字数据库MEDLINE进行了彻底的搜索，PubMed,EMBASE,和Cochrane中央受控试验登记册，通过输入研究行或各种自由词的组合。搜索过程中使用的主要关键词是\"摄影测量\",\"激光扫描仪\",\"光学扫描仪\",\"3D,和“脸”。
结果：所包括的技术均未明显偏离直接人体测量学。所考虑的地标之间的距离的平均差异在1.10至-1.74mm的范围内。
结论：限制患者和扫描仪的运动允许使用所有相关技术进行更准确的面部扫描。主动技术，如激光扫描仪（LS），结构光(SL)，和红外结构光（ISL）具有与静态立体摄影测量相当的精度，同时更具成本效益和更少的耗时。
方法：本综述遵循PRISMA指南及其更新。使用数字数据库MEDLINE进行了彻底的搜索，PubMed,EMBASE,和Cochrane中央受控试验登记册，通过输入研究行或各种自由词的组合。搜索过程中使用的主要关键词是\"摄影测量\",\"激光扫描仪\",\"光学扫描仪\",\"3D,和“脸”。
结果：所包括的技术均未明显偏离直接人体测量学。所考虑的地标之间的距离的平均差异在1.10至-1.74mm的范围内。
结论：限制患者和扫描仪的运动允许使用所有相关技术进行更准确的面部扫描。主动技术，如激光扫描仪（LS），结构光(SL)，和红外结构光（ISL）具有与静态立体摄影测量相当的精度，同时更具成本效益和更少的耗时。
