ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Inertial Measurement Units to Measure Three-Dimensional Spine and Hip Kinematics During Clinical Movement Tasks.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mobile Health (mHealth) for Chronic Low Back Pain Assessment: Design, Development, and Usability Evaluation.JOR spine · 2025Article
- Lumbopelvic Kinematics During Functional Tasks in a Chronic Low Back Pain Observational Cohort.JOR spine · 2025Article
- Anatomy-Based Assessment of Spinal Posture Using IMU Sensors and Machine Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Bioengineering Support in the Assessment and Rehabilitation of Low Back Pain.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide benefits over the traditional optoelectronic motion capture (OMC) systems in measuring kinematics for the low back pain population. The reliability and validity of IMUs to quantify three-dimensional motion for multiple hip/spine segments have not been systematically evaluated. The purpose of this study was to determine the repeated-measures reliability and concurrent validity of an IMU system for measuring the three-dimensional spine/hip kinematics in six common movement assessments. Seventeen participants (32.3 (14.7) years; 11 female) performed two trials each of six range-of-motion assessments while fitted with four IMUs (T1/T2, T12/L1, L5/S1, and femur). The IMUs showed good-excellent reliability for most of the movements in the primary plane and poor-moderate reliability in the non-primary planes. The IMU and OMC systems showed generally good-excellent agreement in the primary plane and RMSE values between 3.03° and 15.75°. The removal of outliers based on the Bland-Altman analysis resulted in RMSE values between 2.44° and 10.30°. The system agreement in the non-primary planes was generally poor-moderate, and the RMSE values ranged from 2.19° to 45.88°. Anomalies in the proprietary sensor fusion algorithm or calibration may have contributed to the large RMSE values, highlighting the importance of assessing data for physiological relevance. The results suggest that these IMUs may be best suited for population-based studies measuring movement in the primary plane and point toward the need for the development of more robust approaches for broader implementation.
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.