ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2025
Foot Measurements From Three-Dimensional Scans: Elinvision 3DST Reliability.
Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2025. 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.
- Foot Measurements From Three-Dimensional Scans: Elinvision 3DST Reliability.Journal of foot and ankle research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background3D foot scanners such as the Elinvision 3DST foot scanner potentially offer a faster, alternative method to traditional plaster casting to produce orthotics or therapeutic footwear. OBJECTIVE(S): To assess the reliability of 3DST-derived foot length, orthogonal ball width, heel width and ball girth. We also compared 3D scanner and manually derived measures. STUDY
designRepeated measures design.
methodsTwo independent raters carried out three scans each of the right foot of 20 healthy participants (10 female) aged 18 years or over (mean age 38 ± 11.4 years) using the 3DST scanner (software v1.6.21.833). Manual foot measurements were taken by an experienced rater using Ritz stick and tape measure.
resultsIntraclass correlation coefficients were excellent for both inter-rater reliability (0.99-1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97-1.00) and intra-rater reliability (Rater 1: 0.98-1.00, 95% CI 0.96-1.00; Rater 2: 0.97-1.00, 95% CI 0.94-1.00). Standard error of the mean ranged from 0.1 to 0.4 cm both for scanner and manual measurements. The mean absolute differences between the scanner and manual measurements were ≤ 0.4 cm for foot length, orthogonal ball width (0.2-0.3 cm), ball girth and heel width (0.3-0.4 cm) but larger for foot waist, short heel, ankle circumference and anatomical ball width (0.5-1.1 cm).
conclusionsThe 3DST scanner has potential application for capture of basic foot dimensions in footwear fit research. However, larger differences relative to manual measures for other dimensions limits its potential in orthotics or therapeutic footwear production.
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.