ArticleSICOT-J2026
Development and measurement of elbow and knee joints using an electro-goniometer in healthy subjects: A preliminary study.
Article in SICOT-J, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRange of Motion (ROM) assessment is a critical baseline metric for diagnosis, treatment monitoring, and rehabilitation goal setting. It significantly impacts patient well-being, aligning with Sustainable Development Goal 3 (SDG 3). However, the universal goniometer (UG), presents limitations regarding accuracy and practical efficiency in clinical settings. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the concurrent validity of an electronic goniometer named Goniwear compared to the UG for measuring elbow and knee angles.
methodsThe validity of Goniwear involved 40 healthy volunteers stratified by age (20-39 and 40-59 years) and sex. Simultaneous active and passive ROM measurements were conducted three times using both UG and on flexion and extension of the elbow and knee joints. Data were analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), which were calculated using a two-way random-effects model, and the Bland-Altman method was used to determine the limits of agreement (LoA) between the UG and Goniwear.
resultsReliability between the two instruments ranged from poor to excellent, depending on the joint and movement type. Elbow flexion and extension demonstrated consistently good to excellent reliability in both active and passive conditions (ICC = 0.84-0.91), with minimal bias and relatively narrow LoA. Knee flexion and extension showed poor to moderate reliability (ICC = 0.44-0.55), particularly for extension, accompanied by a wide LoA.
conclusionAgreement between the UG and Goniwear varies across joints and movement conditions. While the instruments appear interchangeable for elbow movements, caution is warranted when interpreting knee ROM due to greater measurement variability. DISCUSSION: The Goniwear demonstrates high validity for single-axis joints with fixed pivot points, suggesting strong potential for clinical application in specific contexts.
trial registrationThe Thai Clinical Trials Registry is TCTR20251120001.
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.