Page 133 - IJB-7-4

Li, et al
Table 2. Participants’ profile and Euclidean distance results.
Total (n=197) RMSE Euclidean Maximum Euclidean
distance (mm), mean (sd) distance (mm), mean (sd)
Overall 0.62 (0.20) 2.03 (0.75)
Gender, n (%)
Male 159 (80.7) 0.62 (0.20) 2.08 (0.77)
Female 30 (15.2) 0.64 (0.21) 1.82 (0.61)
No response 8 (3.1) - -
Ethnicity, n (%)
Asian 27 (13.7) 0.59 (0.18) 1.80 (0.62)
White 150 (76.1) 0.62 (0.20) 2.05 (0.75)
Others 14 (7.1) 0.63 (0.24) 2.33 (0.86)
No response 6 (3.1) - -
BMI, mean (sd)
Underweight (<18.5) −(0.5) - -
Healthy (18.5 – 24.9) 23.1±1.8 (10.7) 0.59 (0.17) 1.76 (0.67)
Overweight (25.0 – 29.9) 27.4±1.3 (42.1) 0.61 (0.19) 2.02 (0.70)
Obese (>30.0) 36.6±9.3 (43.7) 0.64 (0.21) 2.12 (0.79)
No response −(3.0) - -
Age, mean (sd)
Young (18 – 39) 29.3±6.3 (30.5) 0.56 (0.20) 1.71 (0.64)
Middle aged (40 – 54) 48.5±4.1 (33.5) 0.62 (0.18) 2.06 (0.72)
Senior (55 and above) 61.3±5.3 (32.5) 0.68 (0.20) 2.32 (0.75)
No response −(3.6) - -
BMI; Body mass index, sd; Standard deviation

Table 3. Wilcoxon Rank Sum test results.
RMSE Euclidean Maximum Euclidean
Distance (mm) distance (mm)
H P value H P value
Category 1 Category 2
Gender
Male Female 0 0.814 0 0.061
Ethnicity
Asian White 0 0.375 0 0.061
Asian Others 0 0.711 1 0.035
White Others 0 0.941 0 0.120
BMI
Healthy Overweight 0 0.740 0 0.100
Healthy Obese 0 0.580 1 0.035
Overweight Obese 0 0.673 0 0.394
Age
Young Middle age 0 0.078 1 0.002
Young Senior 1 0.005 1 0.000
Middle age Senior 0 0.165 0 0.051

is a significant improvement compared to conventional scans and just the ScandyPro scans respectively (Light
anthropometric sized RPE where failure rates were found stage scans were not used due to its small sample size),
to be as high as double among females compared to male and similar results were found. This shows that the
colleagues [6-8] , or 16% – 54% among Asians [11,13] . The pipeline can produce demographically non-biased mask
same analyses have been conducted for just the Bellus3D models regardless of acquisition methods.

International Journal of Bioprinting (2021)–Volume 7, Issue 4 129