Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30832385›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Suitability of the Kinect Sensor and Leap Motion Controller-A Literature Review.

Tibor Guzsvinecz, Veronika Szucs, Cecilia Sik-Lanyi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Tibor GuzsvineczDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Systems, University of Pannonia, Veszprem 8200, Hungary. guzsvinecz@virt.uni-pannon.hu.ORCID 0000-0003-3273-313X
Veronika SzucsDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Systems, University of Pannonia, Veszprem 8200, Hungary. szucs@virt.uni-pannon.hu.ORCID 0000-0001-5967-1405
Cecilia Sik-LanyiDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Information Systems, University of Pannonia, Veszprem 8200, Hungary. lanyi@almos.uni-pannon.hu.ORCID 0000-0003-3142-6824

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the need for sensors increases with the inception of virtual reality, augmented reality and mixed reality, the purpose of this paper is to evaluate the suitability of the two Kinect devices and the Leap Motion Controller. When evaluating the suitability, the authors' focus was on the state of the art, device comparison, accuracy, precision, existing gesture recognition algorithms and on the price of the devices. The aim of this study is to give an insight whether these devices could substitute more expensive sensors in the industry or on the market. While in general the answer is yes, it is not as easy as it seems: There are significant differences between the devices, even between the two Kinects, such as different measurement ranges, error distributions on each axis and changing depth precision relative to distance.

Indexed as

accuracygesture recognitionhuman-computer interactionhuman motion trackingKinectLeap Motionprecisionsuitability

Identifiers

PMID30832385
PMCPMC6427122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.