ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2020
A multi-subject accuracy study on granular jamming for non-invasive attachment of fiducial markers to patients.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neckline-free open-source cap design and improved motion resistance for perioperative fNIRS procedures.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
- Head-Mounting Surgical Robots for Passive Compensation of Patient Motion.Journal of medical robotics researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis short communication describes experimental evaluation of a new granular jamming cap (GJC) recently introduced in Wellborn et al. (Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 12(6):1069-1077, 2017). The contributions beyond [8] are (1) to evaluate accuracy across multiple human subjects, and (2) to determine how much of the accuracy improvement is attributable to improved fiducial marker arrangement alone, and how much is due to granular jamming. The motivation for this GJC is to improve the accuracy of image-guidance interfaces in transnasal skull base surgery. Accuracy depends on a rigid connection between tracked fiducial markers and the patient. By molding itself to the unique contours of the individual patient's head and then solidifying, the GJC can firmly attach fiducial markers to a patient, increasing accuracy in the presence of disturbances.
methodsA multi-subject study ([Formula: see text]) was performed to evaluate the accuracy of the GJC compared to a clinically used headband-based fixation device, in the presence of simulated accidental bumping (light force and impact events) that could occur in a real-world operating room.
resultsThe GJC reduced the average target registration error at the pituitary gland by 66% in our force experiments and 78% in our impact experiments, which were statistically significant reductions ([Formula: see text]). Maximum target registration error was similarly reduced by 55% and 78% in the same two perturbation tests.
conclusionThe GJC increases the accuracy of transnasal image-guidance under force and impact perturbations by more firmly, yet non-invasively, attaching fiducial markers to the patient. We find that granular jamming provides accuracy improvement beyond that associated with improved fiducial marker arrangement.
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.