ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2024
Custom orthotic design by integrating 3D scanning and subject-specific FE modelling workflow.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2024. 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.
- 3D-Printed Plantar Orthoses and the Conditional Viability of Recycled PLA.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pilot, Randomized Comparison of Traditionally Fabricated Custom Foot Orthoses vs HP Arize 3D-Printed Orthoses for Plantar Fasciitis.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The finite element (FE) foot model can help estimate pathomechanics and improve the customized foot orthoses design. However, the procedure of developing FE models can be time-consuming and costly. This study aimed to develop a subject-specific scaled foot modelling workflow for the foot orthoses design based on the scanned foot surface data. Six participants (twelve feet) were collected for the foot finite element modelling. The subject-specific surface-based finite element model (SFEM) was established by incorporating the scanned foot surface and scaled foot bone geometries. The geometric deviations between the scaled and the scanned foot surfaces were calculated. The SFEM model was adopted to predict barefoot and foot-orthosis interface pressures. The averaged distances between the scaled and scanned foot surfaces were 0.23 ± 0.09 mm. There was no significant difference for the hallux, medial forefoot, middle forefoot, midfoot, medial hindfoot, and lateral hindfoot, except for the lateral forefoot region (p = 0.045). The SFEM model evaluated slightly higher foot-orthoses interface pressure values than measured, with a maximum deviation of 7.1%. These results indicated that the SFEM technique could predict the barefoot and foot-orthoses interface pressure, which has the potential to expedite the process of orthotic design and optimization.
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.