Does repeated palpation-digitization of pelvic landmarks for measurement of innominate motion introduce a systematic error? – A psychometric investigation
Palpation-digitization technique for measurement of innominate motion involves repeated manual palpation-digitization of pelvic landmarks, which could introduce a systematic variation between subsequent trials and thereby influence final innominate angular measurement.
The aim of this study is to quantify the effect of repeated palpation-digitization errors on overall variability of innominate vector length measurements; and to determine if there is a systematic variation between subsequent repeated trials.
A single group repeated measures study, using four testers and fourteen healthy participants, was conducted. Four pelvic landmarks, left and right posterior superior iliac spine and anterior superior iliac spine, were palpated and digitized using 3D digitizing stylus of Polhemus electromagnetic tracking device, for ten consecutive trials by each tester in their random order. The ten individual trials of innominate vector lengths measured by each tester for each participant were used for the analysis.
Repeated measures ANOVA demonstrated a very small effect of repeated trial factor (≤0.66%) as well as error component (≤0.32%) on innominate vector length variability. Further, residual versus order plots demonstrated a random pattern of errors across zero; thus indicating no systematic variation between subsequent trials of innominate vector length measurements.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,692,577
of 27,778,980 outputs
Outputs from Manual Therapy
#301
of 320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,012
of 287,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Manual Therapy
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,778,980 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 287,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
