Literature DB >> 20219836

Facial anthropometric differences among gender, ethnicity, and age groups.

Ziqing Zhuang1, Douglas Landsittel, Stacey Benson, Raymond Roberge, Ronald Shaffer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The impact of race/ethnicity upon facial anthropometric data in the US workforce, on the development of personal protective equipment, has not been investigated to any significant degree. The proliferation of minority populations in the US workforce has increased the need to investigate differences in facial dimensions among these workers. The objective of this study was to determine the face shape and size differences among race and age groups from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health survey of 3997 US civilian workers.
METHODS: Survey participants were divided into two gender groups, four racial/ethnic groups, and three age groups. Measurements of height, weight, neck circumference, and 18 facial dimensions were collected using traditional anthropometric techniques. A multivariate analysis of the data was performed using Principal Component Analysis. An exploratory analysis to determine the effect of different demographic factors had on anthropometric features was assessed via a linear model. The 21 anthropometric measurements, body mass index, and the first and second principal component scores were dependent variables, while gender, ethnicity, age, occupation, weight, and height served as independent variables.
RESULTS: Gender significantly contributes to size for 19 of 24 dependent variables. African-Americans have statistically shorter, wider, and shallower noses than Caucasians. Hispanic workers have 14 facial features that are significantly larger than Caucasians, while their nose protrusion, height, and head length are significantly shorter. The other ethnic group was composed primarily of Asian subjects and has statistically different dimensions from Caucasians for 16 anthropometric values. Nineteen anthropometric values for subjects at least 45 years of age are statistically different from those measured for subjects between 18 and 29 years of age. Workers employed in manufacturing, fire fighting, healthcare, law enforcement, and other occupational groups have facial features that differ significantly than those in construction.
CONCLUSIONS: Statistically significant differences in facial anthropometric dimensions (P < 0.05) were noted between males and females, all racial/ethnic groups, and the subjects who were at least 45 years old when compared to workers between 18 and 29 years of age. These findings could be important to the design and manufacture of respirators, as well as employers responsible for supplying respiratory protective equipment to their employees.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20219836     DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/meq007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg        ISSN: 0003-4878


  28 in total

1.  Identifying gender differences in reported occupational information from three US population-based case-control studies.

Authors:  Sarah J Locke; Joanne S Colt; Patricia A Stewart; Karla R Armenti; Dalsu Baris; Aaron Blair; James R Cerhan; Wong-Ho Chow; Wendy Cozen; Faith Davis; Anneclaire J De Roos; Patricia Hartge; Margaret R Karagas; Alison Johnson; Mark P Purdue; Nathaniel Rothman; Kendra Schwartz; Molly Schwenn; Richard Severson; Debra T Silverman; Melissa C Friesen
Journal:  Occup Environ Med       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.402

2.  Determination of size-specific exposure settings in dental cone-beam CT.

Authors:  Ruben Pauwels; Reinhilde Jacobs; Ria Bogaerts; Hilde Bosmans; Soontra Panmekiate
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-04-23       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Comparing the face to the body, which is better for identification?

Authors:  Teghan Lucas; Maciej Henneberg
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 2.686

4.  Feasibility of differential geometry-based features in detection of anatomical feature points on patient surfaces in range image-guided radiation therapy.

Authors:  Mazen Soufi; Hidetaka Arimura; Katsumasa Nakamura; Fauzia P Lestari; Freddy Haryanto; Taka-Aki Hirose; Yoshiyuki Umedu; Yoshiyuki Shioyama; Fukai Toyofuku
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2016-06-13       Impact factor: 2.924

5.  Qualitative fitting characteristics of filtering face-piece respirators on Iranian people.

Authors:  Anahita Fakherpour; Mehdi Jahangiri; Mozhgan Seif
Journal:  J Environ Health Sci Eng       Date:  2020-05-26

6.  The Latino Eyelid: Anthropometric Analysis of a Spectrum of Findings.

Authors:  Constance L Fry; Thomas C Naugle; Shelley A Cole; Jonathan Gelfond; Geetha Chittoor; Angeline F Mariani; Martin W Goros; Barrett G Haik; Venkata Saroja Voruganti
Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2017 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 1.746

7.  Effect of Pregnancy Upon Facial Anthropometrics and Respirator Fit Testing.

Authors:  Raymond J Roberge; Jung-Hyun Kim; Andrew Palmiero; Jeffrey B Powell
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.155

8.  A crossover trial investigating the atmospheric content of improvised respirators.

Authors:  Paul R Greig; Clarissa Carvalho; Suniel Ramessur; Jan Schumacher; Kariem El-Boghdadly
Journal:  J Intensive Care Soc       Date:  2021-01-19

9.  Development of a Novel Vital-Signs-Based Infection Screening Composite-Type Camera With Truncus Motion Removal Algorithm to Detect COVID-19 Within 10 Seconds and Its Clinical Validation.

Authors:  Batbayar Unursaikhan; Gereltuya Amarsanaa; Guanghao Sun; Kenichi Hashimoto; Otgonbat Purevsuren; Lodoiravsal Choimaa; Takemi Matsui
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 4.755

10.  Individual and ethnic aspects of preoperative planning for posttraumatic rhinoplasty.

Authors:  Paweł Szychta; Jan Rykała; Julia Kruk-Jeromin
Journal:  Eur J Plast Surg       Date:  2010-08-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.