ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Sensor Architectures and Technologies for Upper Limb 3D Surface Reconstruction: A Review.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Three-dimensional phenotyping: Technological advances and applications in genomics-assisted crop breeding.Plant communications · 2026Review
- Technical Consideration towards Robust 3D Reconstruction with Multi-View Active Stereo Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Study on Reconstruction and Feature Tracking of Silicone Heart 3D Surface.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Computer Vision Meets Image Processing and UAS PhotoGrammetric Data Integration: From HBIM to the eXtended Reality Project of Arco della Pace in Milan and Its Decorative Complexity.Journal of imaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
3D digital models of the upper limb anatomy represent the starting point for the design process of bespoke devices, such as orthoses and prostheses, which can be modeled on the actual patient's anatomy by using CAD (Computer Aided Design) tools. The ongoing research on optical scanning methodologies has allowed the development of technologies that allow the surface reconstruction of the upper limb anatomy through procedures characterized by minimum discomfort for the patient. However, the 3D optical scanning of upper limbs is a complex task that requires solving problematic aspects, such as the difficulty of keeping the hand in a stable position and the presence of artefacts due to involuntary movements. Scientific literature, indeed, investigated different approaches in this regard by either integrating commercial devices, to create customized sensor architectures, or by developing innovative 3D acquisition techniques. The present work is aimed at presenting an overview of the state of the art of optical technologies and sensor architectures for the surface acquisition of upper limb anatomies. The review analyzes the working principles at the basis of existing devices and proposes a categorization of the approaches based on handling, pre/post-processing effort, and potentialities in real-time scanning. An in-depth analysis of strengths and weaknesses of the approaches proposed by the research community is also provided to give valuable support in selecting the most appropriate solution for the specific application to be addressed.
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.