Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision03:37

Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision

Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Random and Systematic Errors01:20

Random and Systematic Errors

Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation01:19

Testing a Claim about Standard Deviation

A complete procedure to test a claim about population standard deviation or population variance is explained here.
The hypothesis testing for the claim of population standard deviation (or variance) requires the data and samples to be random and unbiased. The population distribution also must be normal. There is no specific requirement on the sample size as the estimation is based on the chi-square distribution.
As a first step, the hypothesis (null and alternative) concerning the claim about...
Standard Error of the Mean01:13

Standard Error of the Mean

The sampling variability of a statistic is defined as how much the statistic varies from one sample to another. The sampling variability of a statistic is typically measured by measuring its standard error.The standard error of the mean is an example of a standard error. It is a unique standard deviation known as the standard deviation of the sampling distribution of the mean. The standard error of the mean is a statistic that calculates how correctly a sample distribution represents a...
Statistical Analysis: Overview01:11

Statistical Analysis: Overview

When we take repeated measurements on the same or replicated samples, we will observe inconsistencies in the magnitude. These inconsistencies are called errors. To categorize and characterize these results and their errors, the researcher can use statistical analysis to determine the quality of the measurements and/or suitability of the methods.
One of the most commonly used statistical quantifiers is the mean, which is the ratio between the sum of the numerical values of all results and the...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Impact of Ventricular Catheter Biomaterial Selection: Mechanical Properties and Protein Adsorption.

Journal of medical devices·2026
Same author

Early and Chronic Postnatal Depression, Maternal Sensitivity to Non-Distress and Infant Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in an Indian Birth Cohort.

Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies·2026
Same author

HLA-DRB1*01:03 in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: a genotype-phenotype association study.

The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology·2026
Same author

Author Correction: Autism spectrum disorder.

Nature reviews. Disease primers·2026
Same author

Clinical application of artificial intelligence algorithms in detecting clival remodeling in the setting of pituitary neuroendocrine tumors/pituitary adenomas.

Frontiers in neurology·2026
Same author

Who Should Decide the Outcome for a Clinical Trial? Comparing the Views of Stakeholders on Intervention Benefit Using Multi-Criteria Decision Modelling of Cognitive Remediation.

Schizophrenia bulletin·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 2, 2026

Three-Dimensional Shape Modeling and Analysis of Brain Structures
05:33

Three-Dimensional Shape Modeling and Analysis of Brain Structures

Published on: November 14, 2019

Measurement error in statistical models of shape.

Damian J J Farnell1, Andrew Pickles, Christopher Roberts

  • 1Health Methodology Research Group, School of Community-Based Medicine, Jean McFarlane Building, University Place, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, United Kingdom. dfarnell@glam.ac.uk

Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
|May 10, 2011
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a corrected covariance matrix to reduce placement error in active shape models (ASMs), improving feature extraction accuracy in medical imaging. Enhanced point-placement reliability was demonstrated for clinical experts.

More Related Videos

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

Morphometric Analyses of Shape: The Analysis Software Toolbox for Craniofacial Shape Quantification in Zebrafish
09:03

Morphometric Analyses of Shape: The Analysis Software Toolbox for Craniofacial Shape Quantification in Zebrafish

Published on: February 27, 2026

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 2, 2026

Three-Dimensional Shape Modeling and Analysis of Brain Structures
05:33

Three-Dimensional Shape Modeling and Analysis of Brain Structures

Published on: November 14, 2019

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach
04:35

Development of an Individual-Tree Basal Area Increment Model using a Linear Mixed-Effects Approach

Published on: July 3, 2020

Morphometric Analyses of Shape: The Analysis Software Toolbox for Craniofacial Shape Quantification in Zebrafish
09:03

Morphometric Analyses of Shape: The Analysis Software Toolbox for Craniofacial Shape Quantification in Zebrafish

Published on: February 27, 2026

Area of Science:

  • Medical image analysis
  • Computer vision
  • Biomedical engineering

Background:

  • Active shape models (ASMs) are widely used for feature extraction in medical imaging.
  • Point placement error is a significant source of inaccuracy in ASM applications.
  • Understanding and mitigating measurement error is crucial for reliable shape modeling.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze and quantify the error associated with placing points on feature boundaries using ASMs.
  • To develop a method to reduce the effects of point-placement error in shape models.
  • To derive an equation for the reliability of point placement in clinical settings.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of point-placement error in active shape models (ASMs).
  • Development of a corrected covariance matrix using replications.
  • Analytical and simulation-based evaluation of the method's effectiveness.
  • Principal components analysis (PCA) to assess cumulative variability.

Main Results:

  • A corrected covariance matrix was proposed to mitigate placement error effects.
  • Simulations and analytical results showed reduced cumulative variability with increased point-placement error.
  • Derived reliability values of 0.79 and 0.85 for clinical experts on OSTEODENT data.

Conclusions:

  • The proposed method effectively reduces measurement error in shape models.
  • The findings enhance the understanding of error sources and their impact on ASMs.
  • Improved point-placement reliability has significant implications for medical image analysis accuracy.