SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Reliability of surface topography for scoliosis assessment: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on the COSMIN guideline.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designSystematic review and meta-analysis.
objectiveTo propose a clear classification and definition of currently used ST indices, and to provide a comprehensive evidence assessment of the reliability of ST. Additionally, the study also aims to explore factors that may influence the reliability of these indices.
methodA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and Web of Science. Studies evaluating the reliability of ST indices were screened and selected. Data extraction and assessment of the quality of evidence were also performed following the COSMIN guideline framework. Extracted data included study characteristics and measurement properties. Measurement properties were evaluated according to the COSMIN quality criteria, and methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE approach. Meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the measurement properties.
resultsNineteen studies involving a total of 778 participants were included in this review. The findings indicated that most ST indices demonstrated sufficient reliability for clinical application, although the overall level of evidence was rated as low to moderate. Furthermore, the review suggested that factors such as the use of marker points, participant age, and the presence or absence of scoliosis did not significantly influence the reliability of ST. However, the scanning posture may affect the reliability of ST.
conclusionsThis review highlights ST as a potential radiation-free, informative tool for scoliosis assessment, providing comprehensive data on global musculoskeletal alignment changes with important clinical significance. However, high-quality studies and algorithm improvement are still needed to further explore ST application in screening, progress monitoring, and comprehensive scoliosis assessment.
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.