Cited by 739Face recognition and analysisGenomics and Rare DiseasesFace Recognition and Perception

Identifying facial phenotypes of genetic disorders using deep learning

Gurovich, Yaron, Hanani, Yair, Bar, Omri, Nadav, Guy, Fleischer, Nicole, Gelbman, Dekel, Basel-Salmon, Lina, Krawitz, Peter M. +4 more·2019·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Syndromic genetic conditions, in aggregate, affect 8% of the population 1. Many syndromes have recognizable facial features 2 that are highly informative to clinical geneticists 3-5. Recent studies show that facial analysis technologies measured up to the capabilities of expert clinicians in syndrome identification 6-9. However, these technologies identified only a few disease phenotypes, limiting their role in clinical settings, where hundreds of diagnoses must be considered. Here we present a facial image analysis framework, DeepGestalt, using computer vision and deep-learning algorithms, that quantifies similarities to hundreds of syndromes. DeepGestalt outperformed clinicians in three initial experiments, two with the goal of distinguishing subjects with a target syndrome from other syndromes, and one of separating different genetic subtypes in Noonan syndrome. On the final experiment reflecting a real clinical setting problem, DeepGestalt achieved 91% top-10 accuracy in identifying the correct syndrome on 502 different images. The model was trained on a dataset of over 17,000 images representing more than 200 syndromes, curated through a community-driven phenotyping platform. DeepGestalt potentially adds considerable value to phenotypic evaluations in clinical genetics, genetic testing, research and precision medicine.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41591-018-0279-0

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Facial analysis technology has proven effective in diagnosing TS in resource limited countries.

    “In resource limited countries, facial analysis technology has proven effective in diagnosing TS. Kruszka et al.99 used the DeepGestalt model100 to differentiate TS from unaffected controls and controls with Noonan syndrome in diverse populations.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gurovich, Y., Hanani, Y., Bar, O., Nadav, G., Fleischer, N., Gelbman, D., Basel-Salmon, L., Krawitz, P. M., Kamphausen, S. B., Zenker, M., Bird, L. M., & Gripp, K. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • University Hospital Magdeburg (DE)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children (US)
Corresponding author
Gurovich, Yaron
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2019-01
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
60-64
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W2905441841
Cited by
739
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 74 · 2025: 96 · 2024: 94 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 111 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 60
FWCI
30.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
facial phenotyping, rare genetic disorders, facial image analysis
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Algorithms, Genotype, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Phenotype, Syndrome, Facies, Genetic Diseases, Inborn

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review