ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery, European volume2021
Validation of a smartphone application and wearable sensor for measurements of wrist motions.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, European volume, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity Analysis of Monocular Human Pose Estimation Models Interfaced with a Mobile Application for Assessing Upper Limb Range of Motion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We developed a smartphone application to measure wrist motion using the mobile device's built-in motion sensors or connecting it via Bluetooth to a wearable sensor. Measurement of wrist motion with this method was assessed in 33 participants on two occasions and compared with those obtained with a standard goniometer. The test-retest reproducibility in healthy individuals ranged from good to excellent (intraclass correlation (ICC) 0.76-0.95) for all motions, both with and without the wearable sensor. These results improved to excellent (ICC 0.90-0.96) on the second test day, suggesting a learning effect. The day-to-day reproducibility was overall better with the wearable sensor (mean ICC 0.87) compared with the application without using sensor or goniometer (mean ICC 0.82 and 0.60, respectively). This study suggests that smartphone-based measurements of wrist range of motion are feasible and highly accurate, making it a powerful tool for outcome studies after wrist surgery.
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.