↓ Skip to main content

Comparing 3D foot scanning with conventional measurement methods

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Comparing 3D foot scanning with conventional measurement methods
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13047-014-0044-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yu-Chi Lee, Gloria Lin, Mao-Jiun J Wang

Abstract

Foot dimension information on different user groups is important for footwear design and clinical applications. Foot dimension data collected using different measurement methods presents accuracy problems. This study compared the precision and accuracy of the 3D foot scanning method with conventional foot dimension measurement methods including the digital caliper, ink footprint and digital footprint.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 21%
Student > Master 18 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 12%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 6 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 22 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 16%
Sports and Recreations 9 9%
Computer Science 5 5%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 6 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
#954,083
of 4,691,823 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#121
of 299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,430
of 128,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#12
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,691,823 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 128,402 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.