ArticleActa ortopedica brasileira2026
VALIDATION OF AN OPTICAL METHOD FOR MEASURING THE GAP BETWEEN SUTURED TENDON STUMPS.
Article in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to investigate the accuracy and precision of an optical measurement method based on backlight video analysis for measuring gap distances between tendon stumps in a rigid tendon model. Methods: A rigid 3D-printed tendon model was sutured and subjected to traction using a universal mechanical testing machine. The gap between stumps was filmed in frontal and lateral planes with backlight illumination and a simple mirror system. A custom software program calculated gap distances from the recorded videos and the optical measurements were compared with mechanical testing machine measurements to assess precision and accuracy. Results: The mean difference (bias) in the frontal plane was -0.01 mm (SD: 0.01 mm) and in the lateral plane was 0.04 mm (SD: 0.03 mm). Bland-Altman analysis showed limits of agreement (LoA) of 0.04 mm in the frontal plane and 0.06 mm in the lateral plane. Measurements between planes showed a very strong correlation with a Spearman's rho correlation test of 1.000 (p<0.001). Conclusion: The optical method showed errors on the order of hundredths of a millimeter and proved to be both precise and accurate, validating a new method for gap measurement in biomechanical tendon studies.
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.