ArticleTechnology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine2024
Portable technology for postural control measurement: Comparing head position with center of pressure data.
Article in Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStanding is a basic human function that healthy adults take for granted, yet it is a complex perceptual-motor process that requires sensation of position and motion from the sensory systems.
objectiveWe assessed agreement between center of pressure data from a laboratory force-platform and head position data from an HTC Vive head-mounted display (HMD) for the evaluation of standing postural control. We investigated the impact of different statistical choices when assessing the relationship between two measurements. Specifically: 1) How does correlation and agreement statistics relate before and after logarithmic transformation? 2) Is there systemic or proportional bias between the force-platform and HMD measurements?
methodsWe tested 37 adults (26 controls, 11 with unilateral vestibular hypofunction) standing on foam, observing a static or dynamic visual scene projected from the HMD. We quantified anterior-posterior and medio-lateral sway via Directional Path, Root Mean Square Velocity, Variance, and Power Spectral Density (PSD) from a force-platform and the HMD.
resultsIntra-class correlations (ICCs) were moderate-to-good for the non-transformed data and good-to-excellent after logarithmic transformation for all outcomes except for PSD above 1 Hz. Correlations were higher than ICCs. Bland-Altman plots indicated proportional bias but not after logarithmic transformation.
conclusionsBoth devices correlated linearly, and measure people's postural responses but cannot be used interchangeably, mostly because they appear to diverge with larger sway as evident on Bland-Altman plots of non-transformed data. Agreement between devices was excellent for low frequency movement but poor for high frequency small corrective movements.
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.