↓ Skip to main content

The reliability of a smartphone goniometer application compared with a traditional goniometer for measuring first metatarsophalangeal joint dorsiflexion

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
The reliability of a smartphone goniometer application compared with a traditional goniometer for measuring first metatarsophalangeal joint dorsiflexion
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13047-015-0088-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon J. Otter, Brunilda Agalliu, Nicola Baer, Georgie Hales, Katrina Harvey, Keeley James, Richard Keating, Warren McConnell, Rachel Nelson, Saddaf Qureshi, Steven Ryan, Abigail St. John, Heather Waddington, Katie Warren, Duane Wong

Abstract

Adequate sagittal plane motion of the first metatarsalphalangeal joint (1st MTPJ) is important during normal gait and goniometric measurement is commonly used as a diagnostic and outcome assessment tool. We aimed to determine the intra and inter-rater reliability together with the concurrent validity of a universal plastic goniometer (UG) and a smartphone applicationlication (Dr G) for the measurement of dorsiflexion at the 1st MTPJ. Measurement of joint position and passive range of motion of the 1st MTPJ dorsiflexion was compared using a UG and DrG goniometer. A double-blind repeated measures design was utilized, with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) used to determine levels of reliability. For joint position good intra-rater reliability (ICC >0.861) and good inter-rater reliability (ICC >0.823) was noted. However, the Dr G application consistently measured lower angles (mean 27.8° (SD 8.37)) than the UG (mean 32° (SD 11.7)) and these associations were significant (r = 0.399, p < 0.001). For passive range of motion, the mean total range of dorsiflexion motion (from maximum plantarflexed position to maximum dorsiflexed position) was 82.8° (SD 12.2) for the UG and 82.9° (SD 11.3) for the Dr G application. Both instruments demonstrated high levels of intra-rater reliability (ICC >0.809). Inter-rater reliability was moderate to good for the UG (ICC 0.693 (95 % CI 0.580 to 0.788)) and good for the Dr G application (ICC 0.708 (95 % CI 0.597 to 0.799)). Moderate to high intra and inter-rater reliability of joint position and passive 1st MTPJ motion can be achieved with traditional and smartphone-based goniometric measurement. The Dr G application may provide a slightly higher reliability, but devices should not be used inter-changeably as significant variation in measurement between devices may occur.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 88 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 32%
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Unspecified 7 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Other 26 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 24%
Unspecified 13 14%
Sports and Recreations 9 10%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 11 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 15 October 2015.
All research outputs
#1,740,219
of 12,818,243 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#157
of 517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,391
of 234,154 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,818,243 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 234,154 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them