ArticleJournal of forensic sciences2026
3D scene reconstruction from body-worn camera video using 3DF Zephyr.
Article in Journal of forensic sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Body-worn cameras document crime scenes during initial law enforcement response, yet their potential for forensic reconstruction has not been empirically validated. Despite expanding global adoption, recorded video primarily serves qualitative documentation rather than quantitative measurement applications. This study empirically evaluated three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction accuracy from body-worn camera video to assess its feasibility for feature measurement. Three Axon camera models-Body 2 (AB2), Flex 2 (AF2), and Body 3 (AB3)-were tested in an outdoor parking lot, with each model recording five videos at both 720P and 1080P resolutions (n = 30). Videos were recorded under controlled experimental conditions to achieve optimized documentation scenarios. Videos were processed using 3DF Zephyr photogrammetry software to create 3D reconstructions, then compared against Faro Focus S350 laser scanner ground truth at three distances: long (12.48 m), medium (2.42 m), and short (0.24 m). One-sample t-tests revealed significant differences between AF2 measurements and ground truth (p < 0.05), with a maximum mean error of 14.42 cm at 720P for long distances. AB2 and AB3 showed no significant differences from the ground truth at both resolutions across all validation distances (p ≥ 0.05). Two-sample t-tests demonstrated no significant differences between resolutions (p ≥ 0.05). Single-factor ANOVAs indicated significant differences between camera models (p < 0.05). Resolution did not affect measurement accuracy under the conditions of the controlled methodology and internal software interpolation. These best-case results demonstrate that with deliberate documentation protocols, accurate 3D reconstruction from body-worn camera video is achievable for forensic applications.
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.