ArticleScientific reports2024
Determining critical monitoring periods for accurate wearable step counts in patients with degenerative spine disorders.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Smartphone-based activity research: methodology and key insights.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Longitudinal physical activity monitoring is a novel and promising objective outcome measure for patients with degenerative spine disorder (DSD) that currently lacks established standards for data collection and interpretation. Here, we monitored 100 patients with DSD with the Apple Watch to establish the optimal duration and pattern of step count monitoring needed to estimate their weekly physical activity before their elective surgery. Participants were predominantly female (65.3%), had an average age of 61.5 years, and showed consistent step counts between preoperative days, as well as across weekends and weekdays. Intraclass correlations (ICC) analysis showed that a step count average over 2 days achieved an ICC of 0.92 when compared to a 7-day average before surgery, while 4 days were required for a similar agreement of 0.93 with a 14-day average. Sequential linear regression demonstrated that incorporating additional preoperative days improved the model's ability to predict 7- and 14-days step count averages. We conclude that, while daily preoperative step counts remain relatively stable, longer activity monitoring is necessary to account for the variance in step count over an increasing time frame, and the full extent of data fluctuation may only become apparent with long-term trend analysis.
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.