MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587324921 · doi:10.1055/s-0036-1597914

Reliability and Validity of a Mobile Device Application for Use in Sports-Related Concussion Balance Assessment

2017· article· en· W2587324921 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent research. Concussion · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMultiple Sclerosis SocietyNational Multiple Sclerosis Society
KeywordsIntraclass correlationConcussionForce platformPhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance (ability)Postural instabilityCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Concurrent validityPsychologyReliability (semiconductor)AccelerometerPhysical therapyBalance problemsSimulationPoison controlMedicineInjury preventionComputer scienceDevelopmental psychologyEngineeringPsychometricsInternal consistency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Balance assessment is necessary when evaluating athletes after a concussion. We investigated a mobile device application (app) for providing valid, reliable, and objective measures of static balance. Objectives The mobile device app would demonstrate similar test–retest reliability to force platform center of pressure (COP) sway variables and that SWAY scores and force platform COP sway variables would demonstrate good correlation coefficients. Methods Twenty-six healthy adults performed balance stances on a force platform while holding a mobile device equipped with SWAY (Sway Medical LLC) to measure postural sway based on acceleration changes detected by the mobile device's accelerometer. Participants completed four series of three 10-second stances (feet together, tandem, and single leg), twice with eyes open and twice with eyes closed. Test–retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Concurrent validity of SWAY scores and COP sway variables were determined with Pearson correlation coefficients. Results Reliability of SWAY scores was comparable to force platform results for the same test condition (ICC = 0.21–0.57). Validity showed moderate associations between SWAY scores and COP sway variables during tandem stance (r = –0.430 to –0.493). Lower SWAY scores, indicating instability, were associated with greater COP sway. Discussion The SWAY app is a valid and reliable tool when measuring balance of healthy individuals in tandem stance. Further study of clinical populations is needed prior to assessment use. Conclusion The SWAY app has potential for objective clinical and sideline evaluations of concussed athletes, although continued evaluation is needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.205
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it