Overcoming the challenges of iris scanning to identify minors (1–4 years) in the real-world setting

Abstract

Objective Biometric identification techniques for pediatric use are limited. This investigation studied iris scanning in minors aged 1–4 in two exploratory studies in Belgium (n = 197) and Sierra Leone (n = 230), and in a subsequent clinical study in Sierra Leone (n = 635). Images of participants’ irises were captured using a camera, while a survey assessed the ease of use with children. Results The image capture success rate per individual was high; 86.0% of the participants had ≥ 2 successful captures. Iris scan quality and surface were similar in all age groups and in the matching population database. When including feasibility in the analysis of minors aged 3–4, sensitivity and specificity were non-inferior compared to using the biometric of a guardian. However, the quality of iris scanning in minors aged 1–4 was worse than the iris scanning reference quality in adults. A mean total usability score of 1.55 ± 0.27 was calculated; a usability threshold of 1.45 is required for routine use. Overall, this technique is feasible in minors aged 3–4, replacing the use of guardian biometrics. Additional work is ongoing to improve this technique further, striving for uniformity from the age of 1. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13104-019-4485-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Use of Iris Scanning for Biometric Recognition of Healthy Adults Participating in an Ebola Vaccine Trial in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: Mixed Methods Study

“…Identification and recognition of study participants in a clinical trial-during the process of recruitment and during follow-up visits-is a growing issue [1]. Conventional methods for the recognition of participants in health facilities may include patient name, date of birth, government identity card with photo, and phone number [2][3][4][5]. However, these methods are not always reliable or accurate [5].…”

Leapfrogging with technology: introduction of a monitoring platform to support a large-scale Ebola vaccination program in Rwanda

“…Registration and identification of the participants using the biometric interface were critical to the success of this Ebola vaccine campaign. Biometric identification offers a secure, accurate, and responsible method of uniquely identifying and authenticating health-care users, 36 which is crucial for the efficient and effective delivery of health services and public health management. Identification and authentication of participants is not only applicable to large-scale vaccination programs or Ebola-specific containment campaigns, but in the wider context of communicable diseases.…”

“… 3 Contactless technologies, such as iris scanning, offer a highly accurate method of patient identification while reducing physical contact with potentially contaminated surfaces. 8 , 36 …”

“…The operational set-up in the clinical trial vaccination programs was adapted and improved as detailed. 35 , 36 The tablet was used to identify vaccination campaign participants, record participant demographics, and capture participant passport photos. The user interface on the tablet also supported scanning a Quick Response (QR) code on participant campaign cards and visual inspection of participant records on file through iris recognition via the camera.…”

Intelligent multimodal identification system based on local feature fusion between iris and finger vein

“…The compression between different types of biometrics according to some important characteristics are conducted in Table 1. According to Table 1, we found that Iris and Finger vein had very qualified characteristics to be integrated into a multimodal system [3,[6][7][8][9][10][11].…”