ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026
Recent Advances in Vision-Based Beef Cattle Body Measurement Technologies.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. 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.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Accurate beef cattle body measurement data are crucial for growth assessment, phenotypic analysis, breeding management, and precision livestock farming. Traditional manual measurements are labor-intensive, time-consuming, and likely to cause stress in animals, making it difficult to meet the demands of large-scale livestock farming. This paper employs a structured systematic literature review method, in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, to summarize research progress in vision-based beef cattle body measurement. This paper focuses on reviewing technical approaches such as 2D image-based measurement, 3D measurement using RGB-D and LiDAR, and multi-view fusion. It analyzes key technologies including image segmentation, keypoint detection, point cloud processing, 3D reconstruction, and geometric calculations, and compares the advantages and disadvantages of different methods in terms of measurement accuracy, robustness, cost, and farm applicability. The results indicate that 2D image-based methods are low-cost and flexible to deploy but have limited expressiveness for 3D body measurement parameters; RGB-D and LiDAR methods can provide spatial information but are affected by point cloud noise, occlusion, equipment costs, and data processing complexity; multi-view fusion can improve the completeness of body surface information but places high demands on calibration, registration, and system integration. Current research still faces challenges such as a lack of public datasets, inconsistent annotation standards, uncertainty regarding ground truth, insufficient cross-ranch generalization validation, and limited practical applications. Future research should focus on developing standardized datasets, conducting cross-scenario validation, advancing multimodal perception, creating lightweight models, and applying edge computing to drive the evolution of visual body measurement toward continuous monitoring and intelligent decision-making.
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.