ArticleAmerican journal of veterinary research2026
Augmented reality glasses improve real-time spatial tracking and surface-level annotations on the canine head.
Article in American journal of veterinary research, 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the feasibility, accuracy, and reproducibility of an AR interface for enhancing spatial surface-level tracking on a canine head hologram. We hypothesized that spatial accuracy improves when virtual guides are overlayed directly onto the head rather than when annotations are transferred from a separate screen. Methods: We developed an augmented reality (AR) application in Unity compatible with XREAL's glasses that allowed users to annotate and interact with a realistic 3-D hologram of a dog head. Coordinate (distance) and outline (area) annotations were tested under 2 conditions: (1) transfer-seeing targets from a computer screen-and (2) direct-seeing the targets directly on the head. Results: The mean distance error was significantly lower for direct versus transfer coordinates (2.73 vs 3.42 mm). Similarly, accurate area coverage was higher (83.7% vs 63.3%) with AR guidance. Completion times differed significantly between the groups for coordinate tasks (11.2 vs 8.19 seconds) but not for area tracing (25.7 vs 26.8 seconds). Conclusions: AR-guided visualization improved spatial accuracy for both distance and area metrics without reducing speed. Clinical Relevance: These findings show that AR may be used to optimize surface-level spatial tracking on the canine head. Future work will focus on whether these findings can be translated to a clinical setting and if diagnostic imaging scans can be similarly overlayed onto the surgical plane to expand the medical applications of this technology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42297016What 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.