ArticlePain and therapy2023
Reliability and Validity of A Novel Device for Evaluating the Cervical Proprioception.
Article in Pain and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Privacy-Preserving Head Pose Estimation System for Measuring Cervical Range of Motion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Cervical sensorimotor impairments and neck pain severity in type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional mediation study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Association of segmental body composition with cervical spine mobility in adults with nonspecific neck pain.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- An additional rehabilitation program to improve postoperative outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tear and scapular dyskinesis: a propensity score-matched study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Reliability and Validity of the KFORCE SensBrain sciences · 2024Article
- Article
- Cervical Proprioception Assessed through Targeted Head Repositioning: Validation of a Clinical Test Based on Optoelectronic Measures.Brain sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn clinical practice, cervical proprioception is usually evaluated by calculating the cervical joint position error (JPE) with laser pointer devices (LPD) or cervical range-of-motion (CROM) instruments. As technology continues to improve, more and more advanced tools are used to evaluate cervical proprioception. The purpose of this study was to analyze the reliability and validity of the WitMotion sensor (WS) device in evaluating cervical proprioception, and to explore a cheaper, more convenient, and more practical testing tool.
methodsTwenty-eight healthy participants (16 women, 12 men; age 25-66 years) were recruited and evaluated for cervical joint position error with a WS and LPD by two independent observers. All participants repositioned their head to the target position and the deviation of repositioning was calculated using these two instruments. The intra- and inter-rater reliability of the instrument were determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and the validity was analyzed by calculating the ICC and the Spearman's correlation.
resultsThe intra-rater reliability of the WS (ICCs = 0.682-0.774) was higher than that of the LPD (ICCs = 0.512-0.719) for measuring JPE of cervical flexion, right lateral flexion, and left rotation. However, the LPD (ICCs = 0.767-0.796) outperformed the WS (ICCs = 0.507-0.661) in cervical extension, left lateral flexion, and right rotation. For the inter-rater reliability, the ICC values obtained by the WS and the LPD were above 0.70 for all cervical movements except cervical extension and left lateral flexion (ICCs = 0.580-0.679). For the validity, the ICC values were moderate to good (ICCs > 0.614) for measuring JPE in all movements with the WS and the LPD.
conclusionsBased on the high ICC values of reliability and validity, the novel device can be an alternative tool to evaluate cervical proprioception in clinical practice.
trial registrationThis study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100047228).
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.