Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026875›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2023

Automatic anatomical foot and ankle coordinate toolbox.

Andrew C Peterson, Karen M Kruger, Amy L Lenz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 3D foot and ankle radiographic measurement toolbox.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. New insights into chronic ankle instability: anFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Automatic anatomical foot and ankle coordinate toolbox.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew C PetersonDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
Karen M KrugerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, United States.
Amy L LenzDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States.
University of Utah · USMarquette University · US

Funding

Post-Surgical Form and Function of Planovalgus Foot Deformities in Patients with Cerebral PalsyR01AR083490 · NIAMS · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI Amy L. Lenz · 2024 to 2026
$1.9M
Classification of Ankle Osteoarthritis Severity from Weightbearing Computed Tomography Using Statistical Shape Modeling and Machine LearningK01AR080221 · NIAMS · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI Amy L. Lenz · 2022 to 2026
$707k
NIAMS NIH HHS K01 AR080221NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR083490
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate analysis of bone position and orientation in foot and ankle studies relies on anatomical coordinate systems (ACS). Reliable ACSs are necessary for many biomechanical and clinical studies, especially those including weightbearing computed tomography and biplane fluoroscopy. Existing ACS approaches suffer from limitations such as manual input, oversimplifications, or non-physiological methods. To address these shortcomings, we introduce the Automatic Anatomical Foot and Ankle Coordinate Toolbox (AAFACT), a MATLAB-based toolbox that automates the calculation of ACSs for the major fourteen foot and ankle bones. In this manuscript, we present the development and evaluation of AAFACT, aiming to provide a standardized coordinate system toolbox for foot and ankle studies. The AAFACT was evaluated using a dataset of fifty-six models from seven pathological groups: asymptomatic, osteoarthritis, pilon fracture, progressive collapsing foot deformity, clubfoot, Charcot Marie Tooth, and cavovarus. Three analyses were conducted to assess the reliability of AAFACT. Firstly, ACSs were compared between automatically and manually segmented bone models to assess consistency. Secondly, ACSs were compared between individual bones and group mean bones to assess within-population precision. Lastly, ACSs were compared between the overall mean bone and group mean bones to assess the overall accuracy of anatomical representation. Statistical analyses, including statistical shape modeling, were performed to evaluate the reliability, accuracy, and precision of AAFACT. The comparison between automatically and manually segmented bone models showed consistency between the calculated ACSs. Additionally, the comparison between individual bones and group mean bones, as well as the comparison between the overall mean bone and group mean bones, revealed accurate and precise ACSs calculations. The AAFACT offers a practical and reliable solution for foot and ankle studies in clinical and engineering settings. It accommodates various foot and ankle pathologies while accounting for bone morphology and orientation. The automated calculation of ACSs eliminates the limitations associated with manual input and non-physiological methods. The evaluation results demonstrate the robustness and consistency of AAFACT, making it a valuable tool for researchers and clinicians. The standardized coordinate system provided by AAFACT enhances comparability between studies and facilitates advancements in foot and ankle research.

Indexed as

anatomicautomated toolboxcoordinate systemfoot and anklefoot deformitiesmorphological variation

Identifiers

PMID38026875
PMCPMC10644787
OpenAlexW4388080536

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.