Fig. 4
From: 3D scanner’s potential as a novel tool for lymphedema measurement in mouse hindlimb models
Comparative analysis of measurement discrepancies across raters. (a) Silk and scanner methods compared with the micro-CT reference in terms of circumference: Boxplots compare the variability of the silk and scanner methods with the micro-CT reference across the three raters. The plots highlight the significantly lower variability of the scanner method, showcasing its superior consistency and reliability in measuring limb dimensions. This makes the scanner method a preferable choice for accurate limb assessments. (b) Caliper and scanner methods compared with the micro-CT reference in terms of paw thickness: This figure illustrates the comparison of paw thickness measurements using the caliper and scanner methods compared with the CT reference across three raters. The analysis shows that the scanner method measurements are notably closer to the CT values, as evidenced by the lower variability and tighter confidence intervals compared with the caliper method. This indicates the enhanced precision and reliability of the scanner method for paw thickness assessments, Silk: Circumference measured using the silk method. Scanner: Circumference measured using the scanner method.
CT: Circumference measured using micro-CT. X: Average.
