ReviewShoulder & elbow2024
How do digital range of motion measurement devices 'measure-up' to traditional goniometry in assessing shoulder range of motion? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Shoulder & elbow, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06629038 (A Novel Technique for Estimating Maximal Jaw Movement, Neck and Shoulder Joint Range of Motion Using an Artificial Intelligence Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
A Novel Technique for Estimating Maximal Jaw Movement, Neck and Shoulder Joint Range of Motion Using an Artificial Intelligence Model
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Altered Gluteus Maximus and Latissimus Dorsi Activation in Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: Implications for Kinetic Chain Dysfunction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond Corticosteroids: Ultrasound-Guided Regenerative and Hydrodissection Therapies for Adhesive Capsulitis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Video-based examination of patients with shoulder pain: a scoping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Shoulder range of motion (ROM) is traditionally measured using universal goniometry. However, novel devices to measure shoulder ROM digitally are becoming increasingly available. We aimed to synthesise the current evidence to answer: 1) what technologies are currently in use? 2) Are they reliable? 3) How do they compare to goniometry? Methods: Systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Emcare and Cochrane databases were searched to identify studies comparing a digital device measuring shoulder ROM to goniometry in participants > = 18years. Quality of studies was assessed using COSMIN risk of bias tool. End points included device validity compared to goniometry and intra-rater reliability. Results: 15 articles were included, representing 372 participants and 608 shoulders, and reporting data for five device categories; infrared/RGB-D, 3D-motion-analysis, combined 3D/infra-red, 2D-video-analysis and virtual-reality. Nine studies reported mean bias and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) compared to goniometry. Pooled mean bias was -0.25 degrees (-1.25, 0.75 95% LOA, random effects model) overall. This did not differ by device type (p = 0.83), sensor or non-sensor-based devices (p = 0.62) or plane of movement (p = 0.91). Conclusions: These devices compare well to goniometry and represent a possible means of increasing efficiency and facilitating telemedicine.
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.