ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Conformity assessment of a computer vision-based posture analysis system for the screening of postural deformation.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. 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.
- Exploring the clinical utility of postural outcome tools for back and neck pain clinical outcomes: a systematic scoping review.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Clinical Decision Support System Used in Spinal Disorders: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluates the conformity of using a computer vision-based posture analysis system as a screening assessment for postural deformity detection in the spine that is easily applicable to clinical practice.
methodsOne hundred forty participants were enrolled for screening of the postural deformation. Factors that determine the presence or absence of spinal deformation, such as shoulder height difference (SHD), pelvic height difference (PHD), and leg length mismatch (LLD), were used as parameters for the clinical decision support system (CDSS) using a commercial computer vision-based posture analysis system. For conformity analysis, the probability of postural deformation provided by CDSS, the Cobb angle, the PHD, and the SHD was compared and analyzed between the system and radiographic parameters. A principal component analysis (PCA) of the CDSS and correlation analysis were conducted.
resultsThe Cobb angles of the 140 participants ranged from 0° to 61°, with an average of 6.16° ± 8.50°. The postural deformation of CDSS showed 94% conformity correlated with radiographic assessment. The conformity assessment results were more accurate in the participants of postural deformation with normal (0-9°) and mild (10-25°) ranges of scoliosis. The referenced SHD and the SHD of the CDSS showed statistical significance (p < 0.001) on a paired t-test. SHD and PHD for PCA were the predominant factors (PC1 SHD for 79.97%, PC2 PHD for 19.86%).
conclusionThe CDSS showed 94% conformity for the screening of postural spinal deformity. The main factors determining diagnostic suitability were two main variables: SHD and PHD. In conclusion, a computer vision-based posture analysis system can be utilized as a safe, efficient, and convenient CDSS for early diagnosis of spinal posture deformation, including scoliosis.
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.