Crowdsourcing as a Novel Method to Evaluate Aesthetic Outcomes of Treatment for Unilateral Cleft Lip

Background: Lack of convenient and reliable methods to grade aesthetic outcomes limits the ability to study results and optimize treatment of unilateral cleft lip. Crowdsourcing methods solicit contributions from a large group to achieve a greater task. The authors hypothesized that crowdsourcing could be used to reliably grade aesthetic outcomes of unilateral cleft lip. Methods: Fifty deidentified photographs of 8- to 10-year-old subjects (46 with unilateral cleft lip and four controls) were assembled. Outcomes were assessed using multiple pairwise comparisons that produced a rank order (Elo rank) of nasal appearance and, on a separate survey, by Asher-McDade ratings. Both surveys were repeated to assess reliability. A group of expert surgeons repeated the same tasks on a smaller subset of photographs. Results: The authors obtained 2500 and 1900 anonymous, layperson evaluations by means of crowdsourcing on each Elo rank and Asher-McDade survey, respectively. Elo rank and Asher-McDade scores were highly reproducible (correlation coefficients, 0.87 and 0.98), and crowd evaluations agreed with those by expert surgeons (0.980 and 0.96 for Elo rank and Asher-McDade score, respectively). Crowdsourcing surveys were completed within 9 hours, whereas the expert surgeons required 3 months. On further analysis of their cleft subject sample set, the authors found that greater initial cleft severity was associated with worse aesthetic outcome. Conclusions: Outcomes assessed by crowds were reliable and correlated well with expert assessments. Crowdsourcing allows acquisition of massive numbers of layperson assessments on an unprecedented scale, and is a convenient, rapid, and reliable means of assessing aesthetic outcome of treatment for unilateral cleft lip. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, IV.

[1]  D. Kuik,et al.  The Asher-McDade Aesthetic Index in Comparison With Two Scoring Systems in Nonsyndromic Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Patients , 2015, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[2]  Lee W. White,et al.  Crowdsourcing to Assess Surgical Skill. , 2015, JAMA surgery.

[3]  Leib Litman,et al.  The relationship between motivation, monetary compensation, and data quality among US- and India-based workers on Mechanical Turk , 2014, Behavior Research Methods.

[4]  P. Christou,et al.  Aesthetic outcome of cleft lip and palate treatment. Perceptions of patients, families, and health professionals compared to the general public. , 2013, Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

[5]  A. Adeola,et al.  Developing a visual rating chart for the esthetic outcome of unilateral cleft lip and palate repair , 2015, Annals of maxillofacial surgery.

[6]  W. Shaw,et al.  Development of a method for rating nasolabial appearance in patients with clefts of the lip and palate. , 1991, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[7]  G. J. Mellenbergh,et al.  Facial attractiveness and facial impairment ratings in children with craniofacial malformations. , 2001, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[8]  D. Mosmuller,et al.  Scoring Systems of Cleft-Related Facial Deformities: A Review of Literature , 2013, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[9]  A. Kuijpers-Jagtman,et al.  Infant Orthopedics and Facial Appearance: A Randomized Clinical Trial (Dutchcleft) , 2006, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[10]  A. Acquisti,et al.  Reputation as a sufficient condition for data quality on Amazon Mechanical Turk , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[11]  V. P. Sharma,et al.  Outcomes in facial aesthetics in cleft lip and palate surgery: a systematic review. , 2012, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.

[12]  A. Kuijpers-Jagtman,et al.  Nasolabial symmetry and esthetics in cleft lip and palate: analysis of 3D facial images , 2015, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[13]  Raymond Tse,et al.  Objective Measurements for Grading the Primary Unilateral Cleft Lip Nasal Deformity , 2008, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[14]  A. Kuijpers-Jagtman,et al.  Reference Photographs for Nasolabial Appearance Rating in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate , 2009, The Journal of craniofacial surgery.

[15]  J. Tobiasen,et al.  Reliability of esthetic ratings of cleft impairment. , 1988, The Cleft palate journal.

[16]  W. Shaw,et al.  A six-center international study of treatment outcome in patients with clefts of the lip and palate: Part 4. Assessment of nasolabial appearance. , 1992, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[17]  Raymond Tse,et al.  Reliability of Nasolabial Anthropometric Measures Using Three-Dimensional Stereophotogrammetry in Infants with Unrepaired Unilateral Cleft Lip , 2014, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[18]  Adrien Treuille,et al.  Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game , 2010, Nature.

[19]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Crowd-sourced assessment of surgical skills in cricothyrotomy procedure. , 2015, The Journal of surgical research.

[20]  Z. Popovic,et al.  Crystal structure of a monomeric retroviral protease solved by protein folding game players , 2011, Nature Structural &Molecular Biology.

[21]  Q. Zeng-Treitler,et al.  Assessing Pictograph Recognition: A Comparison of Crowdsourcing and Traditional Survey Approaches , 2015, Journal of medical Internet research.

[22]  J. Daskalogiannakis,et al.  The Americleft Project: A Proposed Expanded Nasolabial Appearance Yardstick for 5- to 7-Year-Old Patients with Complete Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate (CUCLP) , 2016, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[23]  Timothy M. Kowalewski,et al.  Crowd-sourced assessment of technical skills: an adjunct to urology resident surgical simulation training. , 2014, Journal of endourology.

[24]  E. Bronkhorst,et al.  Rating nasolabial appearance on three-dimensional images in cleft lip and palate: a comparison with standard photographs. , 2016, European journal of orthodontics.

[25]  Timothy M. Kowalewski,et al.  Crowd-Sourced Assessment of Technical Skills: a novel method to evaluate surgical performance. , 2014, The Journal of surgical research.

[26]  J. Hardwicke,et al.  Facial Aesthetic Outcomes of Cleft Surgery: Assessment of Discrete Lip and Nose Images Compared with Digital Symmetry Analysis , 2016, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[27]  D. Wertheim,et al.  The Use of Facial Anthropometrics in Aesthetic Assessment , 2009, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[28]  W. Shaw,et al.  The Americleft Study: An Inter-Center Study of Treatment Outcomes for Patients with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Part 4. Nasolabial Aesthetics , 2011, The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association.

[29]  Li-Ming Su,et al.  Crowdsourcing Assessment of Surgeon Dissection of Renal Artery and Vein During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Novel Approach for Quantitative Assessment of Surgical Performance. , 2016, Journal of endourology.

[30]  A. Allori,et al.  Measuring outcomes in cleft lip and palate treatment. , 2014, Clinics in plastic surgery.

[31]  W. Paiva,et al.  Aesthetic Evaluation of the Nasolabial Region in Children with Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Comparing Expert versus Nonexperience Health Professionals , 2014, BioMed Research International.

[32]  J. Hardwicke,et al.  Facial aesthetic outcome analysis in unilateral cleft lip and palate surgery using web-based extended panel assessment. , 2016, Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS.