ArticleJournal of medical and biological engineering2016
Evaluation of Kinect 3D Sensor for Healthcare Imaging.
Article in Journal of medical and biological engineering, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors affecting augmented reality head-mounted device performance in real OR.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
- Validity of sagittal thoracolumbar curvature measurement using a non-radiographic surface topography method.Spine deformity · 2022Article
- A Low-Cost Foot-Placed UWB and IMU Fusion-Based Indoor Pedestrian Tracking System for IoT Applications.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- KinectGaitNet: Kinect-Based Gait Recognition Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Solution for the Remote Care of Frail Elderly Individuals via Exergames.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Systematic Comparison of Depth Map Representations for Face Recognition.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Advancements in Methods and Camera-Based Sensors for the Quantification of Respiration.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Nonrigid reconstruction of 3D breast surfaces with a low-cost RGBD camera for surgical planning and aesthetic evaluation.Medical image analysis · 2019Article
- An Egg Volume Measurement System Based on the Microsoft Kinect.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
- Automatic Detection of Compensation During Robotic Stroke Rehabilitation Therapy.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2018Article
- Dioptric defocus maps across the visual field for different indoor environments.Biomedical optics express · 2018Article
- Depth accuracy of the RealSense F200: Low-cost 4D facial imaging.Scientific reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microsoft Kinect is a three-dimensional (3D) sensor originally designed for gaming that has received growing interest as a cost-effective and safe device for healthcare imaging. Recent applications of Kinect in health monitoring, screening, rehabilitation, assistance systems, and intervention support are reviewed here. The suitability of available technologies for healthcare imaging applications is assessed. The performance of Kinect I, based on structured light technology, is compared with that of the more recent Kinect II, which uses time-of-flight measurement, under conditions relevant to healthcare applications. The accuracy, precision, and resolution of 3D images generated with Kinect I and Kinect II are evaluated using flat cardboard models representing different skin colors (pale, medium, and dark) at distances ranging from 0.5 to 1.2 m and measurement angles of up to 75°. Both sensors demonstrated high accuracy (majority of measurements <2 mm) and precision (mean point to plane error <2 mm) at an average resolution of at least 390 points per cm
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.