ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Analysis of Mathematical Models and App-Based Measurement for Estimating the Cutaneous Wound Areas of Captive Asian Elephants.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the variation in the area estimation under different mathematical calculations against measurement by a smartphone application in estimating the cutaneous wound areas in captive Asian elephants. Methods The study was conducted on captive Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) with cutaneous wounds reported to Veterinary Hospitals of Kerala Veterinary and Animal Sciences University and elephant camps within and outside Kerala state (mostly southern states of India, namely, Kerala and Tamil Nadu) over the period September 2019 to October 2022. Thirty-five clinical cases diagnosed with skin wounds of different aetiologies at various parts of the body were subjected to measurement, and 111 measurements were taken using a smartphone application, Imito Measure (Imito AG, Zurich, Switzerland). Based on the outer wound perimeters hand-marked on the mobile screen over the image taken, Imito Measure calculated the length, width, perimeter, and area. The length and width measurements from this were applied to four mathematical models of wound measurements. Wound surface area calculations were further done by these models and were compared. Results The observed results indicated no significant difference between the five methods of area measurement in all the studied cases since the P > 0.05. Conclusion The findings revealed no significant difference between the five techniques of wound area measurement. From the practical clinical utility point, the smartphone application has an edge over the mathematical methods in animals, especially captive Asian elephants, as it has the major advantage of being non-contact and thus addresses some major welfare concerns.
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.