ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Advances in the Measurement and Interpretation of Intervertebral Motion in the Lumbar Spine: A Scoping Review.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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.
- Recent Findings and Developments in Spine Biomechanics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
backgroundIntervertebral motion is a fundamental aspect of spinal biomechanics, crucial for understanding lumbar spine function, pain mechanisms, and surgical outcomes. Various methods exist for measuring and interpreting it, each with its own advantages, limitations, and specific applications. However, a comprehensive and standard taxonomy of study types for the measurement and interpretation of in vivo intervertebral motion in the lumbar spine is lacking.
objectivesThis review aimed to systematically identify, characterise, and categorise the diverse study types deposited in the literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Only studies in English and of lumbar spine intervertebral motion in living subjects were considered, and only those that employed objective measurement of motion sequences were included. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, CINAHL, and SCOPUS for articles published between January 2000 and October 2025. CHARTING
methodsAfter removal of duplicates, all studies were subjected to Title and abstract screening, followed by full-text screening of potentially eligible studies. Data selected were charted into tables under the headings: author, year, country, purpose, technology, participants, measurement, interpretation, radiation dosage, and significance of findings.
resultsForty-nine studies were abstracted and are described under 11 study types. These formed a taxonomy constituting the following six categories: normal biomechanical mechanisms, pathological and injury mechanisms, direct kinematic measurement, spinal stabilisation, dynamic radiography, and clinical markers. The resulting taxonomy will serve as a resource for researchers, clinicians, and policymakers by facilitating a more coherent understanding of the field and promoting standardisation in research design and reporting.
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.