ArticlePloS one2024
A comparative study of 3D measuring methods for monitoring breast volume changes.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Smartphone-Based 3D Surface Imaging for Breast Anthropometry, Symmetry Assessment, and Volumetry: A Structured Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Smartphone-Based 3D Surface Imaging: A New Frontier in Digital Breast Assessment? Smartphone-Based Breast Assessment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Use of Three-Dimensional Surface Imaging to Measure Breast Volume in the Upright Position With Acceptable Accuracy.European journal of breast health · 2025Article
- Variations in Volume: Breast Size in Trans Women in Relation to Timing of Testosterone Suppression.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D) imaging techniques are promising new tools for measuring breast volume, for example in gender-affirming therapy. Transgender individuals can be treated with gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT). A robust method for monitoring breast volume changes is critical to be able to study the effects of feminizing GAHT. The primary aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of three 3D devices (Vectra XT, Artec LEO and iPhone XR) for measuring modest breast volume differences using a mannequin. The secondary aim of this study was to evaluate these methods in several performance domains. We used reference prostheses of increasing volumes and compared the volumes using GOM-inspect software. For Vectra XT 3D images, manufacturer-provided software was used to calculate volumes as well. The scanning methods were ranked based on their performance in a total of five categories: volume estimations, costs, user-friendliness, test subject-friendliness and technical aspects. The 3D models analyzed with GOM-inspect showed relative mean estimate differences from the actual volumes of 9.1% for the Vectra XT, 7.3% for the Artec LEO and 14% for the iPhone XR. For the Vectra XT models analyzed with the built-in software this was 6.2%. Root mean squared errors (RMSE) calculated based on the GOM-inspect volume analyses showed mean RMSEs of 2.27, 2.54 and 8.93 for the Vectra XT, Artec LEO and iPhone XR, respectively. The Vectra software had a mean RMSE of 3.00. In the combined performance ranking, the Vectra XT had the most favorable ranking, followed by the Artec LEO and the iPhone XR. The Vectra XT and Artec LEO are the preferred scanners to monitor breast development due to the combination of higher accuracy and overall performance. The current study shows that 3D techniques can be used to adequately measure modest breast volume differences and therefore will be useful to study for example breast changes in transgender individuals using feminizing GAHT. These observations may also be relevant in other fields of 3D imaging research.
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.