MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135892868 · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzab091

Smartphone Inclinometry Is a Valid and Reliable Tool for Measuring Frontal Plane Tibial Alignment in Healthy and Osteoarthritic Knees

2021· article· en· W3135892868 on OpenAlexafffund
Calvin T.F. Tse, Jesse M. Charlton, Jennifer Lam, Joanne Ho, Jessica Bears, Amanda Serek, Michael A. Hunt

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInstitute of Musculoskeletal Health and ArthritisCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BCNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsIntraclass correlationCoronal planeOsteoarthritisInter-rater reliabilityConfidence intervalMedicineConcurrent validityOrthodonticsReliability (semiconductor)Limits of agreementPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMathematicsNuclear medicineReproducibilitySurgeryStatisticsAnatomyRating scalePathologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Frontal plane knee alignment plays an integral role in tibiofemoral knee osteoarthritis development and progression. Accessible methods for obtaining direct or indirect measures of knee alignment may help inform clinical decision making when specialized equipment is unavailable. The present study evaluated the concurrent validity, as well as intersession (within-rater) and interrater (within-session) reliability of smartphone inclinometry for measuring static frontal plane tibial alignment-a known proxy of frontal plane knee alignment. METHODS: Twenty healthy individuals and 38 patients with knee osteoarthritis were measured for frontal plane tibial alignment by a pair of raters using smartphone inclinometry, manual inclinometry, and 3-dimensional motion capture simultaneously. Healthy participants were measured on 2 separate days. Bland-Altman analysis, supplemented with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)(2,k), was used to assess concurrent validity. ICC(2,k), SEM, and minimum detectable change with 95% confidence limits (MDC95) were used to assess measurement reliability. RESULTS: Compared against motion capture, smartphone inclinometry measured frontal plane tibial alignment with a mean difference of 0.7 and 1.1 degrees (biased toward varus) for healthy participants and participants with knee osteoarthritis, respectively (ICC[2,k] ≥ 0.87). Smartphone inclinometry measurements demonstrated adequate intersession (within-rater) relative (ICC[2,k] = 0.91) and absolute (SEM = 0.7 degrees; MDC95 = 1.8 degrees) reliability, which outperformed manual inclinometry (ICC[2,k] = 0.85; SEM = 1.0 degrees; MDC95 = 2.6 degrees). Interrater (within-session) reliability of smartphone inclinometry was acceptable in both cohorts (ICC[2,k] = 0.93; SEM = 0.4 degrees to 1.2 degrees; MDC95 = 1.2 degrees to 3.2 degrees). CONCLUSION: Smartphone inclinometry is sufficiently valid and reliable for measuring frontal plane tibial alignment in healthy individuals and patients with medial tibiofemoral knee osteoarthritis. IMPACT: Smartphones are readily accessible by clinicians and researchers. Our assessment of measurement validity and reliability supports the use of smartphone inclinometry as a clinically available tool to measure frontal plane tibial alignment without medical imaging or specialized equipment.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207