ArticlePeerJ2026
Comparison of the performance of a Three-Dimensional Body Scanner and radiography in evaluating adult scoliosis.
Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Enhanced accuracy and safety of TiRobot-assisted pedicle screw placement in spinal deformity: an age-stratified meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adult scoliosis, which is characterized by a persistent lateral deviation of the spine of at least 10° in the frontal plane along with vertebral rotation in adulthood, can result from various causes, including degenerative changes, untreated childhood scoliosis, spinal trauma, and prior surgeries. Traditionally, spinal curvature is assessed by measuring the Cobb angle via radiographic imaging; however, concerns over radiation exposure have prompted exploration of alternative diagnostic tools.This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a newly developed three-dimensional (3D) body scanner, equipped with 12 depth cameras, in assessing spinal alignment and measuring the Cobb angle in patients with adult scoliosis, in comparison with radiographic imaging. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 40 patients with adult scoliosis-both idiopathic and degenerative-underwent evaluation using both radiographic imaging and 3D body scanning. Cobb angles were measured by both methods. Pearson and Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the linear and monotonic relationships between measurements. Measurement accuracy was quantified using the mean bias from Bland-Altman analysis and spatial agreement of spinal positions was further evaluated using the Intersection over Union (IoU) metric. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess whether body habitus (body mass index, waist circumference, waist-to-height ratio, age, and sex) influenced the absolute error between 3D body scanner-predicted and radiographic Cobb angles. Results: Cobb angle measurements obtained from 3D body scanning were highly correlated with those from radiography (Pearson Conclusions: The 3D body scanner exhibits promise for assessing spinal alignment and measuring the Cobb angle in patients with adult scoliosis, offering a reliable alternative to traditional radiographic methods. Its accuracy was not affected by obesity-related indices, supporting its applicability across diverse patient body types. Future research should focus on refining scanning protocols and integrating patient-reported outcomes to enhance clinical utility.
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.