MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388098728 · doi:10.2196/46067

Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction in Endurance Runners Using Wearable Technology as a Clinical Monitoring Tool: Systematic Review

2023· article· en· W4388098728 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

VenueJMIR Biomedical Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWearable computerPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineJoint (building)Physical therapyComputer scienceEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In recent years, researchers have delved into the relationship between the anatomy and biomechanics of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain and dysfunction in endurance runners to elucidate the connection between lower back pain and the SIJ. However, the majority of SIJ pain and dysfunction cases are diagnosed and managed through a traditional athlete-clinician arrangement, where the athlete must attend regular in-person clinical appointments with various allied health professionals. Wearable sensors (wearables) are increasingly serving as a clinical diagnostic tool to monitor an athlete's day-to-day activities remotely, thus eliminating the necessity for in-person appointments. Nevertheless, the extent to which wearables are used in a remote setting to manage SIJ dysfunction in endurance runners remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to conduct a systematic review of the literature to enhance our understanding regarding the use of wearables in both in-person and remote settings for biomechanical-based rehabilitation in SIJ dysfunction among endurance runners. In addressing this issue, the overarching goal was to explore how wearables can contribute to the clinical diagnosis (before, during, and after) of SIJ dysfunction. METHODS: Three online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, were searched using various combinations of keywords. Initially, a total of 4097 articles were identified. After removing duplicates and screening articles based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 45 articles were analyzed. Subsequently, 21 articles were included in this study. The quality of the investigation was assessed using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews. RESULTS: Among the 21 studies included in this review, more than half of the investigations were literature reviews focusing on wearable sensors in the diagnosis and treatment of SIJ pain, wearable movement sensors for rehabilitation, or a combination of both for SIJ gait analysis in an intelligent health care setting. As many as 4 (19%) studies were case reports, and only 1 study could be classified as fully experimental. One paper was classified as being at the "pre" stage of SIJ dysfunction, while 6 (29%) were identified as being at the "at" stage of classification. Significantly fewer studies attempted to capture or classify actual SIJ injuries, and no study directly addressed the injury recovery stage. CONCLUSIONS: SIJ dysfunction remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in endurance runners. Moreover, there is a lack of clear diagnostic or treatment pathways using wearables remotely, despite the availability of validated technology. Further research of higher quality is recommended to investigate SIJ dysfunction in endurance runners and explore the use of wearables for rehabilitation in remote settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.318 · 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