Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41214243›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging informatics in medicine2026

Segmentation and Clustering Analysis of Scanned Foot Models for Intelligent Diabetic Foot Ulcer Offloading Boots.

Yaser Sabzehmeidani, Andrei-Alexandru Popa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging informatics in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yaser SabzehmeidaniThe Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, SDU Mechatronics (CIM), University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Alsion 2, 6400, Sønderborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3388-9398
Andrei-Alexandru PopaThe Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, SDU Mechatronics (CIM), University of Southern Denmark (SDU), Alsion 2, 6400, Sønderborg, Denmark. andrei@sdu.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5729-464X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a common and severe complication of diabetes that leads to amputation if not effectively managed. Intelligent offloading or rehabilitation devices or boots are used to manage or observe the ulcer and the process of treatment which requires the segmentation and clustering analysis of 3D scanned foot models. This study examines the effectiveness of two widely used clustering algorithms, K-Means and Gaussian Mixture Models (GMM), in segmenting scanned foot models to use in rehabilitation boots. The performance of K-Means and GMM was compared across 98 foot models. GMM consistently achieved higher silhouette scores (0.58 vs. 0.42 for K = 5), lower Davies-Bouldin scores (0.47 vs. 0.54 for K = 5), and more stable clustering across anatomical sections, despite requiring almost 20% more computation time. These results highlight GMM's superior ability to capture the complex nonlinear structures of diabetic feet, with implications for more precise and personalized offloading boot design. Precise segmentation of scanned foot models is a crucial step in various anatomical and medical applications, such as the design of custom orthotic devices, rehabilitation offloading boots, and the analysis of foot biomechanics-particularly useful within DFU management.

Indexed as

Diabetic FootFootFoot OrthosesImaging, Three-DimensionalShoesAlgorithmsCluster AnalysisClustering AlgorithmsHumansModels, Anatomic3D foot scanningClustering algorithmsDiabetic foot ulcer (DFU)Rehabilitation bootSegmentation

Identifiers

PMID41214243
PMCPMC13481599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.