↓ Skip to main content

Does postural stability differ between adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis and typically developed? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Does postural stability differ between adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis and typically developed? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis
Published in
Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13013-018-0163-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marlene Dufvenberg, Fisayo Adeyemi, Isabelle Rajendran, Birgitta Öberg, Allan Abbott

Abstract

Postural stability deficits have been proposed to influence the onset and progression of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). This study aimed to systematically identify, critically evaluate and meta-analyse studies assessing postural stability during unperturbed stance with posturography in AIS compared to typically developed adolescents. Studies from four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PEDro) were searched and case-control methodological quality assessed using a risk-of-bias assessment tool and a posturography methodological quality checklist. Pooled data regarding centre of pressure (COP) parameters such as sway area, Mediolateral (ML) and Anteroposterior (AP) position and range were compared for AIS and typically developed adolescents using Cohen's d effect size (ES) and homogeneity estimates. Eighteen studies for quality analysis and 9 of these for meta-analysis were identified from 971 records. Risk-of-bias assessment identified 6 high, 10 moderate and 2 low risk-of-bias studies. The posturography methodological quality checklist identified 4 low, 7 moderate and 7 high-quality studies. Meta-analysis was performed for sway area whereas ML and AP are presented in three different meta-analyses due to divergent measurement units used in the studies: ML position 1 (MLP1), ML position 2 (MLP2) and ML range (MLR); AP position 1 (APP1), AP position 2 (APP2) and AP range (APR). Cohen's d showed a medium ES difference in sway area 0.65, 95% CI (0.49-0.63), whereas ML showed no (MLP1, MLP2) and large (MLR) ES differences; MLP1 0.15, 95% CI (0.08-0.22); MLP2 0.14, 95% CI (0.08-0.19); and MLR 0.94, 95% CI (0.83-1.04). Cohen's d for AP showed small ES (APP1) and large ES difference (APP2 and APR); APP1 0.43, 95% CI (0.31-0.54); APP2 0.85, 95% CI (0.72-0.97); and APR 0.98, 95% CI (0.87-1.09). Cochran's Q and Higgins I2 showed homogeneity between studies. There is moderate quality evidence for decreased postural stability in AIS measured as COP parameters sway area, ML and AP range with a positional shift posteriorly in the sagittal plane. The findings support studying postural stability in early stage AIS and also prospectively identify cause and effect of the curvature as well as effectiveness of postural control interventions in the prevention of scoliosis progression.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Researcher 7 8%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 33 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Engineering 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 39 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 November 2021.
All research outputs
#6,433,502
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#19
of 97 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,581
of 335,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scoliosis and Spinal Disorders
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 97 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 335,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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