ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Smartphone Photogrammetric Assessment for Head Measurements.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Smartphone and tablet-based 3D scanner for anthropometric assessments in adults: a systematic review of reliability, validity, and accuracy.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Pooled it
- Smartphone Sensor Battery Consumption: A Standardized and Reproducible Test Protocol.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cranial normality indices in Ugandan infants based on smartphone photogrammetry: key parameters for the study of cranial deformation.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- Changes in infant head shape: Developmental trends during the first year of life and secular changes observed in recent years.PloS one · 2026Article
- Craniofacial 3D Morphometric Analysis with Smartphone-Based Photogrammetry.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
The assessment of cranial deformation is relevant in the field of medicine dealing with infants, especially in paediatric neurosurgery and paediatrics. To address this demand, the smartphone-based solution PhotoMeDAS has been developed, harnessing mobile devices to create three-dimensional (3D) models of infants' heads and, from them, automatic cranial deformation reports. Therefore, it is crucial to examine the accuracy achievable with different mobile devices under similar conditions so prospective users can consider this aspect when using the smartphone-based solution. This study compares the linear accuracy obtained from three smartphone models (Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra, S22, and S22+). Twelve measurements are taken with each mobile device using a coded cap on a head mannequin. For processing, three different bundle adjustment implementations are tested with and without self-calibration. After photogrammetric processing, the 3D coordinates are obtained. A comparison is made among spatially distributed distances across the head with PhotoMeDAS vs. ground truth established with a Creaform ACADEMIA 50 while-light 3D scanner. With a homogeneous scale factor for all the smartphones, the results showed that the average accuracy for the S22 smartphone is -1.15 ± 0.53 mm, for the S22+, 0.95 ± 0.40 mm, and for the S22 Ultra, -1.8 ± 0.45 mm. Worth noticing is that a substantial improvement is achieved regardless of whether the scale factor is introduced per device.
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.