ArticleThe international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS2025
Measuring Abdominal Skin-Surface Distances Using Photos for Perforator Mapping Analysis-A Validation Study on 3D-Printed DIEP-Flap Models.
Article in The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS, 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.
- Measuring Abdominal Skin-Surface Distances Using Photos for Perforator Mapping Analysis-A Validation Study on 3D-Printed DIEP-Flap Models.The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe present a novel method for accurately measuring skin-surface distances using standard smartphone photos and Photoshop, validated on 3D-printed DIEP-flap models and on calibration grid-patterns. MATERIALS AND
methodsDistance measurements are acquired in Photoshop in a calibration plane between dots on a grid-pattern as well as between perforators on photos of 3D-printed models and compared against ground-truth. Margins of errors are calculated from fitted linear models.
resultsSubmillimeter accuracy can be achieved within errors of ±0.45 mm (80% probability) and ±0.8 mm (95% probability) for measuring distances on the dot-grid. On the 3D-printed DIEP-models, distance measurements are accurate within ±1.75 mm (80% probability) and ±3.1 mm (95% probability).
conclusionsWe introduce a simple yet highly accurate technique to measure skin-surface distances using normal photos. Depending on the scenario, submillimeter or conservatively very low millimetre errors can be achieved, sufficiently accurate for clinical use, whilst maintaining topographic relationships of the measurements.
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.