Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42231846›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2026

Digital range of motion analysis is sensitive to subjective steps in joint model construction.

R J Lowes, A Jannel, B W Griffin, T L Prescott, P L Falkingham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

R J LowesSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9813-0898
A JannelSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6625-5693
B W GriffinSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9454-6212
T L PrescottSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-0836-8395
P L FalkinghamSchool of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1856-8377

Funding

UK Research and Innovation TRACKEVOL
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reconstructing locomotion and behaviour in extinct vertebrates requires a detailed understanding of joint mobility to constrain the range of potential limb orientations to more biologically plausible poses. Joint mobility is typically assessed using range of motion (ROM) analysis, which is increasingly implemented within digital workflows. Digital ROM analysis requires the positioning of bones in three-dimensional space into a starting pose that enables systematic sampling of rotational and translational configurations (e.g. reference pose). However, this initial process involves subjective steps, particularly in selecting articular surfaces and defining a joint centre of rotation. No thorough sensitivity analysis has yet been published. In this study, we have conducted systematic sensitivity analyses of a complete six degree-of-freedom automated ROM analysis workflow to evaluate how variation at each stage of the reference pose assembly, stemming from both input data and user decision, affects the determined viable poses in the ankle and tarsometatarsophalangeal III joints of Guinea fowl (Numida meleagris). Our results reveal that ROM analysis outputs are sensitive to variation in reference pose assembly, especially changes in articular surface selection and the primitive used to define the joint centre. This sensitivity may be unlikely to directly affect the overall conclusions of any given individual study, particularly when using maximum viable rotations to constrain biomechanical models. However, it potentially makes comparison between studies and taxa problematic, and we therefore advocate that future ROM studies should prioritise providing complete joint models as supplemental data to enable replicability.

Indexed as

avianbiomechanical modellingjoint mobilityrange of motionsix degrees of freedom

Identifiers

PMID42231846
PMCPMC13398749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.