ArticlePloS one2018
Measurements agreement between low-cost and high-level handheld 3D scanners to scan the knee for designing a 3D printed knee brace.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of 3D scanning versus traditional methods of capturing foot and ankle morphology for the fabrication of orthoses: a systematic review.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2021Pooled it
- Accuracy of Facial Digitization Using a New Mobile Device-Compatible 3D Scanner for Malocclusion.The Journal of craniofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of accuracy and speed between plaster casting, high-cost and low-cost 3D scanners to capture foot, ankle and lower leg morphology of children requiring ankle-foot orthoses.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2024Article
- A Review on 3D Scanners Studies for Producing Customized Orthoses.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Automatic Multiview Alignment of RGB-D Range Maps of Upper Limb Anatomy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Development of an individual helmet orthosis for infants based on a 3D scan.3D printing in medicine · 2023Article
- Development of 3D printed patient-specific skull implants based on 3d surface scans.3D printing in medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical trials of 3D printing splints to avoid contracture development in burned childrenTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- Digital Leg Volume Quantification: Precision Assessment of a Novel Workflow Based on Single Capture Three-dimensional Whole-Body Surface Imaging.Journal of digital imaging · 2021Article
- Article
- The functional effect of 3D-printing individualized orthosis for patients with peripheral nerve injuries: Three case reports.Medicine · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Use of additive manufacturing is growing rapidly in the orthotics field. This technology allows orthotics to be designed directly on digital scans of limbs. However, little information is available about scanners and 3D scans. The aim of this study is to look at the agreement between manual measurements, high-level and low-cost handheld 3D scanners. We took two manual measurements and three 3D scans with each scanner from 14 lower limbs. The lower limbs were divided into 17 sections of 30mm each from 180mm above the mid-patella to 300mm below. Time to record and to process the three 3D scans for scanners methods were compared with Student t-test while Bland-Altman plots were used to study agreement between circumferences of each section from the three methods. The record time was 97s shorter with high-level scanner than with the low-cost (p = .02) while the process time was nine times quicker with the low-cost scanner (p < .01). An overestimation of 2.5mm was found in high-level scanner compared to manual measurement, but with a better repeatability between measurements. The low-cost scanner tended to overestimate the circumferences from 0.1% to 1.5%, overestimation being greater for smaller circumferences. In conclusion, 3D scanners provide more information about the shape of the lower limb, but the reliability depends on the 3D scanner and the size of the scanned segment. Low-cost scanners could be useful for clinicians because of the simple and fast process, but attention should be focused on accuracy, which depends on the scanned body segment.
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.