ArticleCureus2024
Reliability of a Measurement Method for Upper Limb Raised Standing Spinal Alignment Using a Smartphone Inclinometer Application.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex-Specific Associations Between Sagittal Spinal Alignment and Postural Control in Recreational Strength-Trained Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Smartphone-based abdominal inclination angles for assessing abdominal obesity: Convergent validity and reliability study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the reliability and validity of spinal alignment measurements in the raised arm standing posture using a smartphone app.
backgroundAn inclinometer is a reliable tool for measuring spinal alignment. Measurement of static standing posture spinal curvature angles using smartphone inclinometer applications has been investigated in the lumbar spine but has not been reported for the thoracic spine. However, the sacral vertebrae were used as the reference point for the measurement of the lumbar spine, and the method of palpation of the sacral vertebrae was unclear. No measurement methods, including inclinometers, have been found for upper limb elevation.
methodsThoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis angles were measured in 18 healthy young adults (mean age: 21.0 ± 3.5). Measurements were taken in the raised standing posture. The points of measurement included angle α at the thoracic spine (T)1/2, angle β at the T12/lumbar spine (L)1, and angle γ at the L4/L5 spinous processes. The thoracic kyphosis angle was calculated as the sum of α and β, while the lumbar lordosis angle was the sum of β and γ. Two raters measured these angles twice using the same smartphones. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 2.1), and measurement precision was determined by calculating MDC95 from the ICC values. Validity was also carried out on 12 healthy young adults (age: 20.8 ± 4.0 years). The measurement points were the same as described above, and two types of measurements were taken with a smartphone and an inclinometer; the results of the two types of measurements were used to determine the relationship using Pearson's correlation coefficient.
resultsDuring upper limb raising, the smartphone's ICC (95% confidence interval) was 0.92 (0.81-0.97) for thoracic kyphosis and 0.90 (0.74-0.96) for lumbar lordosis. The MDC95 values indicated acceptable precision, with 7.00° for thoracic kyphosis and 9.95° for lumbar lordosis. All correlation coefficients between inclinometers and smartphones were above 0.9 for both the thoracic and lumbar spines.
conclusionsMeasuring spinal alignment angles using a smartphone inclinometer app in the raised standing posture demonstrates good reliability for inter-rater comparisons. It was also good with regard to validity.
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.