ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Assessment of Elbow Proprioception with Inertial Measurement Units-Validity and Reliability Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInertial measurement units (IMUs) represent a relatively new and promising method for motion analysis. Their main advantages include small size and portability, combined with the use of advanced technologies. To date, few studies have investigated the application of these devices for proprioception assessment, and none have focused specifically on the elbow joint. Therefore, the aim of our study was to assess reliability and validate the protocol of elbow proprioception evaluation using inertial motion sensors.
methodsTwenty healthy participants underwent active and passive proprioception assessments based on joint position sense (JPS). Two researchers independently performed evaluation. The analyzed data was the error of reproduction of joint position (ERJP). IMU (RSQ Motion sensors) were used for angular joint position assessment and validated against Biodex System 4.
resultsInter-rater reliability for passive proprioception was good, with a Kendall's coefficient of 0.77 (
conclusionsThese results suggest proprioception assessment by JPS using inertial motion sensors is reliable and valid. It is an easy to use, light, portable, and inexpensive alternative for proprioception assessment, although further research in diverse clinical settings is needed.
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.