Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34960280›Full record

SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Reliability of the Microsoft Kinect and Ambulatory Sensor-Based Motion Tracking Devices to Measure Shoulder Range-of-Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Peter Beshara, David B Anderson, Matthew Pelletier, William R Walsh

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Accuracy of the Automated Range of Motion Observer and Reporter Software for Fully Automated Joint Measurement From Patient Videos.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Methodological quality of 100 recent systematic reviews of health-related outcome measurement instruments: an overview of reviews.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Peter BesharaDepartment of Physiotherapy, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5600-7178
David B AndersonSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Matthew PelletierPrince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1643-6696
William R WalshPrince of Wales Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, 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

Advancements in motion sensing technology can potentially allow clinicians to make more accurate range-of-motion (ROM) measurements and informed decisions regarding patient management. The aim of this study was to systematically review and appraise the literature on the reliability of the Kinect, inertial sensors, smartphone applications and digital inclinometers/goniometers to measure shoulder ROM. Eleven databases were screened (MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE, CINAHL, SPORTSDiscus, Compendex, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, Proquest Science and Technology, Scopus, and PubMed). The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the consensus-based standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Reliability assessment used intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) and the criteria from Swinkels et al. (2005). Thirty-two studies were included. A total of 24 studies scored "adequate" and 2 scored "very good" for the reliability standards. Only one study scored "very good" and just over half of the studies (18/32) scored "adequate" for the measurement error standards. Good intra-rater reliability (ICC > 0.85) and inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.80) was demonstrated with the Kinect, smartphone applications and digital inclinometers. Overall, the Kinect and ambulatory sensor-based human motion tracking devices demonstrate moderate-good levels of intra- and inter-rater reliability to measure shoulder ROM. Future reliability studies should focus on improving study design with larger sample sizes and recommended time intervals between repeated measurements.

Indexed as

ShoulderShoulder JointHumansRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsUpper Extremityinertial sensorKinectmeta-analysisrange of motionreliability

Identifiers

PMID34960280
PMCPMC8705315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.