Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33348775›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

The Reliability and Validity of Wearable Inertial Sensors Coupled with the Microsoft Kinect to Measure Shoulder Range-of-Motion.

Peter Beshara, Judy F Chen, Andrew C Read, Pierre Lagadec, Tian Wang, William Robert Walsh

Registry-linked trialAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06629038 (A Novel Technique for Estimating Maximal Jaw Movement, Neck and Shoulder Joint Range of Motion Using an Artificial Intelligence Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06629038 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

A Novel Technique for Estimating Maximal Jaw Movement, Neck and Shoulder Joint Range of Motion Using an Artificial Intelligence Model

TypeobservationalSponsorNational Taiwan University HospitalRan2024 to 2026Enrolled40ConditionsOral CancerArmsobservation alone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Peter BesharaDepartment of Physiotherapy, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5600-7178
Judy F ChenDepartment of Physiotherapy, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Andrew C ReadDepartment of Physiotherapy, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Pierre LagadecVald Performance, Brisbane, QLD 4006, Australia.
Tian WangFaculty of Medicine, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
William Robert WalshFaculty of Medicine, Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5023-6148

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObjective assessment of shoulder joint active range of motion (AROM) is critical to monitor patient progress after conservative or surgical intervention. Advancements in miniature devices have led researchers to validate inertial sensors to capture human movement. This study investigated the construct validity as well as intra- and inter-rater reliability of active shoulder mobility measurements using a coupled system of inertial sensors and the Microsoft Kinect (HumanTrak).

methods50 healthy participants with no history of shoulder pathology were tested bilaterally for fixed and free ROM: (1) shoulder flexion, and (2) abduction using HumanTrak and goniometry. The repeat testing of the standardised protocol was completed after seven days by two physiotherapists.

resultsAll HumanTrak shoulder movements demonstrated adequate reliability (intra-class correlation (ICC) ≥ 0.70). HumanTrak demonstrated higher intra-rater reliability (ICCs: 0.93 and 0.85) than goniometry (ICCs: 0.75 and 0.53) for measuring free shoulder flexion and abduction AROM, respectively. Similarly, HumanTrak demonstrated higher intra-rater reliability (ICCs: 0.81 and 0.94) than goniometry (ICCs: 0.70 and 0.93) for fixed flexion and abduction AROM, respectively. Construct validity between HumanTrak and goniometry was adequate except for free abduction. The differences between raters were predominately acceptable and below ±10°.

conclusionsThese results indicated that the HumanTrak system is an objective, valid and reliable way to assess and track shoulder ROM.

Indexed as

Range of Motion, ArticularShoulderWearable Electronic DevicesBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansReproducibility of ResultsgoniometryKinectmeasurementrange of motionsensorshoulder

Identifiers

PMID33348775
PMCPMC7766751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.