Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review

Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review Andreas Gundersen, Stian Larsen, Roland van den Tillaar This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background spine pain is a leading contributor to global pain and disability, and knowledge of spinal kinematics is essential for understanding and managing this pain and pathology. Expensive and laboratory-confined optoelectronic motion capture systems are considered the gold standard for joint angle measurement, but recently, small and inexpensive inertial measurement units (IMUs) have emerged as a promising alternative, and the rapid growth of literature in this area required a systematic review. Methods this systematic review aimed to compile and assess the current literature on concurrent validity (compared to gold standard optoelectronic systems) and test-retest reliability of IMUs for inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of recently developed ISB guidelines. Three different databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched. Methodological quality was determined using a structured quality appraisal tool, while direction and strength of evidence were determined based on four criteria (imprecision, risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency). Results 37 studies met the eligibility criteria. Reported validity and reliability metrics indicate that IMUs have the potential to derive reliable and clinically valid spinal kinematics across all anatomical planes and regions. However, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Conclusions IMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to optoelectronic systems, but their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols. Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Key points IMUs are capable of deriving clinically valid and reliable spinal kinematics across all spinal regions and anatomical planes. However, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Therefore, while IMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to lab-based systems, their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols. INTRODUCTION Spine pain is a leading contributor to disability worldwide ( 1 , 2 ). The global prevalence estimates of lumbar and cervical pain are between 23–42% and 30%, respectively ( 1 , 2 ). Though distinct spinal regions exhibit unique anatomical properties, the pain prevalence seem to involve similar and multi-factorial mechanisms ( 1 ), such as mechanical and psychosocial factors ( 1 , 3 , 4 ). Knowledge of spinal kinematics is thus essential for understanding and managing spinal pain and pathology ( 5 , 6 ). Consequently, several cohorts assess spine motion to characterize movement patterns during clinical evaluations, sports performance, and activities of daily living (ADL). Methods for assessing spinal motion may vary depending on setting, spinal region, movement type, and population. In clinics, spinal motion is frequently tested through uni-planar movement tests, and measured by visual observation, inclinometers, or goniometers. Although inexpensive and non-invasive, these methods are limited by their inability to perform continuous and multi-planar analyses. For more comprehensive analyses, optoelectronic motion capture systems are considered the gold standard. However, these systems are expensive and confined to laboratory environments, reducing their accessibility and applicability to real-world situations. Therefore, alternative methods that overcome these limitations are needed to enable less restricted data collections. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are portable and inexpensive body-worn sensors offering a promising solution for capturing the desired motion data. Although technical variations exist between manufacturers, IMUs estimate orientation through fusing data sampled by integrated accelerometers, gyroscopes, and often magnetometers. These orientation data can subsequently be processed to derive joint kinematics using various approaches ( 7 ). An increasing popularity of IMUs for assessing human kinematics is evident through their growing representation in recent biomechanical literature ( 7 , 8 ). This development is justified by studies reporting acceptable validity and reliability across diverse protocols and populations ( 9 – 15 ). However, dependencies on sensor placement, movement tasks and frequencies, and anatomical planes and regions are also evident in the literature ( 11 , 16 – 19 ). Additionally, results have been shown to differ between fusion algorithms ( 18 , 20 , 21 ), and kinematic modelling approaches ( 22 ). Consequently, methodological nuances complicate the use of IMUs for biomechanical purposes ( 8 ), and failure to adhere correct procedures may lead to unreliable results ( 7 ). In response to these methodological challenges, the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) recently proposed guidelines for definition, estimation, and reporting of human joint kinematics using IMUs ( 7 ). Based on five categories - sensor characteristics and calibration, experimental protocol, kinematic model and calibration, joint kinematic analysis, and quality assessment - the recommendations aim to advance both the design and review of IMU research ( 7 ). Although several literature reviews have assessed IMU validity and reliability for spinal kinematics ( 12 , 13 , 16 , 19 , 23 ), none have been conducted with access to the recent ISB guidelines. Moreover, previous reviews have focused separately on individual spinal regions, including the entire trunk ( 16 , 19 ), the lumbar spine ( 12 , 23 ) and the cervical spine ( 13 , 19 ), while the thoracic spine remains unaddressed and no review has yet evaluated all spinal regions within a cohesive framework. Particularly given IMUs known dependency on methodology, anatomical region, and movement task ( 7 , 16 , 19 ), an updated and broader review merging the literature on validity and reliability in all spinal regions is warranted to clarify the potential for deriving IMU-based kinematics throughout the spine. This information may provide practitioners and researchers in both sports and clinical contexts an updated perspective on the use of IMUs for assessing spinal kinematics. Therefore, this systematic review aims to compile and assess the current literature on concurrent validity (compared to gold standard optoelectronic systems) and test-retest reliability of IMUs for inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of the recent ISB guidelines. METHODS Search strategy A systematic search of the following databases was conducted from inception to 3rd of February 2025: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy is shown in Table 1 , and was designed to include terms in the categories IMU, spine, kinematics, and outcome. Minor technical adjustments were made to meet requirements for each database. Moreover, complementary searches were made in Google Scholar and previous relevant reviews were cross-referenced. Lastly, authors of restricted articles were contacted to request full-text access. Table 1 search strategy terms IMU " ( "inertial measurement unit" OR imu OR "wearable sensor" OR "inertial sensor" ) Spine AND ( "lumbar" OR "thoracic" OR "cervical" OR "spine" OR "spinal" OR "trunk" OR "torso" OR "thorax" OR "neck" OR "lower back" OR "lower-back" OR "upper back" OR "upper-back" ) Kinematics AND ( "motion" OR "range of motion" OR "kinematics" OR "kinematic" OR "movement" OR "joint angle" OR "kinetic" OR "kinetics" OR "flexion" OR "extension" OR "rotation" ) Outcome AND ( "accuracy" OR "reliability" OR "validity" OR "validation" OR "gold standard" OR "motion capture" OR "optoelectronic" OR "marker based" OR "marker-based" ) " Inclusion and exclusion criteria Inclusion criteria stipulated studies to: a) use at least a six-axis IMU (three-axis accelerometer and three-axis gyroscope), b) report relative angles between two or more IMUs, c) include statistical measures of test-retest reliability or concurrent validity compared to a gold standard optoelectronic motion capture system and present these values in tables, d) capture movement during either controlled clinical assessment tasks (flexion-extension, lateral flexion, and rotation) or during complex, multi-planar movements, e.g. sports-related actions or ADL, e) report data representing either a specific anatomical joint angle or rotation around a specified axis, with controlled clinical assessment data extracted from the primary plane of movement, f) report data for each spinal region individually. Studies were excluded if they were conference papers or book chapters, and not written in English or conducted on human subjects. Studies failing to meet these criteria were excluded. Methodological quality This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines ( 24 ). Also, Study quality was assessed by the lead researcher (A.H.G) using a version of the Critical Appraisal of Study Design for Psychometric Articles , modified to specifically evaluate the psychometric properties of IMU studies (Appendix 1) ( 25 ). The checklist contains 12 items distributed across five main categories: ( 1 ) study question, ( 2 ) study design, ( 3 ) measurements, ( 4 ) analyses, and ( 5 ) recommendations. Each item is rated either 2 (satisfactory), 1 (partially satisfactory), or 0 (unsatisfactory), resulting in a maximum score of 24. However, item six applies solely to reliability studies, resulting in a maximum score of 22 among validity studies. Based on score percentage, studies were categorized as high quality (85–100%), medium quality (70–85%), low quality (50–70%), or very low quality (< 50%) ( 25 ). Data extraction A custom excel spreadsheet was created to extract methodological parameters following the ISB reporting checklist for IMU studies ( 7 ), along with relevant statistical outcomes ( 19 , 25 , 26 ). The full spreadsheet is available in Appendix 2 and includes: a) kinematic model, b) kinematic analysis, c) study information, d) IMU specifications, e) statistical outcomes. Metrics extracted for concurrent validity were: intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Pearsons correlation coefficient (r), root mean square error (RMSE), bias, upper and lower limits of agreement (LoA), coefficient of determination (r 2 ), and coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC). The test-retest reliability metrics were ICC, standard error of measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and minimum detectable change (MDC). While all data was extracted and available in Appendix 3, statistical outcomes from studies reporting multiple values per metric per analysis were averaged prior to analysis. All data from the included studies were extracted by the lead researcher (A.H.G). Data pooling and analysis Studies were pooled based on a multi-stage grouping of outcomes. As such, all studies were grouped as assessing either the lumbar, thoracic, cervical, or trunk regions. Outcomes were then dichotomized as assessing either validity or reliability, and separated into overarching outcome groups (movement plane and complex or controlled movement). Studies reporting data across multiple parameters were included in each relevant subgroup accordingly. Measurements focused exclusively on either the lumbar, thoracic, or cervical spine were classified accordingly, whereas studies evaluating the combined motion of the lower and upper back were categorized as trunk assessments. Controlled movements were defined as those performed controlled and confined to a single anatomical plane (sagittal, frontal, or transverse), whereas complex movements involved unrestricted and/or multi-planar motion. As validity is shown to decrease during analysis in non-primary movement directions (e.g. analyzing flexion/extension angles in lateral flexion trials) ( 27 ), only results from the primary rotation axes were analyzed for the controlled movements. Due to substantial heterogeneity in study methodology, a meta-analysis was not feasible. Therefore, the analysis was constrained to qualitative analysis only. The qualitative analysis evaluated the strength of evidence for validity and reliability in each spinal region, and the overall evidence was determined based on four criteria. These criteria were sample size and number of studies (imprecision), methodological quality (risk of bias), methodological and outcome similarities (indirectness), and alignment in results (inconsistency) ( 19 ). Thereby, the evidence was graded as either strong, moderate, limited, very limited, or conflicting (Table 2 ) ( 26 , 28 ). Agreement metrics (e.g. ICC, r, and CMC) were considered as poor ( 0.90) ( 19 , 25 , 29 ). To reflect a broader but still clinically meaningful interpretation of error, RMSE and SEM can be interpreted as clinically acceptable ( 10°) ( 30 , 31 ). Table 2 Showing requirements for each level of evidence. Multiple (≥2 studies). Strong evidence Multiple high-quality studies with consistent results. Moderate evidence Multiple studies, including one high quality or multiple studies of at least medium quality with consistent results. Limited evidence Multiple studies, including one medium-quality or multiple studies of at least low quality with consistent results. Very limited evidence One low-quality or medium-quality study or multiple very low quality with consistent results. Conflicting evidence Multiple studies providing inconsistent results, regardless of the methodological quality. RESULTS A total of 1287 studies were identified through the systematic database search (Fig. 1 . Following duplicate removal and screening, 37 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review (Tables 3 and 4 ). Of these, 21 studies examined complex movement tasks, and 23 tested controlled clinical tasks. Regarding movement planes, 35 studies analyzed joint angles in the sagittal plane, 30 in the frontal plane, and 27 in the transverse plane. Methodological quality Scores ranged from 36.4–100%, with two studies rated as high quality, sixteen as medium quality, thirteen as low quality, and six as very low quality (Table 3 ). Overall, studies scored highest on item four, with no study receiving a score of zero, and lowest on item five, where only six studies received a top score of 2. Table 3 Quality assessment scoring of 37 studies. HQ (high quality), MQ (medium quality), LQ (low quality), VLQ (very low quality). Study information Study question Study design Measurement Analyses Rec. Total Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 % Quality Beange, Chan ( 10 ) 2 1 2 2 1 0 2 2 2 1 2 2 79.2 MQ Aranda-Valera, Cuesta-Vargas ( 11 ) 1 2 1 2 2 N/A 1 2 2 2 2 1 81.8 MQ Matheve, De Baets ( 32 ) 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 83.3 MQ Michaud, Perez Soto ( 33 ) 2 2 0 1 0 N/A 2 1 1 0 0 1 45.5 VLQ Mjosund, Boyle ( 14 ) 2 1 1 2 1 N/A 1 2 2 2 2 2 81.8 MQ O'Grady, O'Dwyer ( 34 ) 1 2 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 79.2 MQ Senington, Lee ( 35 ) 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 37.5 VLQ Wong and Wong ( 36 ) 2 1 0 1 0 N/A 1 0 1 1 0 1 36.4 VLQ Bailes, Johnson ( 31 ) 2 2 1 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 75 MQ Beange, Chan ( 9 ) 2 1 2 2 0 N/A 2 2 2 1 1 2 77.3 MQ Chang, Smith ( 37 ) 2 2 1 2 0 N/A 1 2 1 2 1 2 72.7 MQ Franco, Sengupta ( 38 ) 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 2 2 2 2 2 2 100 HQ Graham, Dupeyron ( 39 ) 2 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 2 2 1 2 62.5 LQ Bauer, Rast ( 27 ) 1 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 75 MQ Duc, Salvia ( 40 ) 2 1 1 2 0 N/A 2 1 2 1 1 2 68.2 LQ Barreto, Peixoto ( 41 ) 1 1 1 2 1 N/A 2 2 1 1 2 1 68.2 LQ Gil-Agudo, de Los Reyes-Guzman ( 42 ) 1 0 0 2 0 N/A 0 1 2 1 1 1 40.9 VLQ Humadi, Nazarahari ( 43 ) 2 1 1 2 0 N/A 1 2 2 0 1 0 54.6 LQ Keidan, Ibrahim ( 44 ) 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 2 1 1 2 1 62.5 LQ Lee, Akhundov ( 45 ) 2 2 1 2 0 N/A 2 1 2 1 2 2 77.3 MQ Morrow, Lowndes ( 46 ) 1 1 0 2 0 N/A 2 2 1 2 1 1 59.1 LQ Nikkhoo, Niu ( 47 ) 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 1 1 37.5 VLQ Raya, Garcia-Carmona ( 48 ) 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 41.7 VLQ Riffitts, Oh ( 49 ) 1 1 1 1 0 N/A 1 1 2 2 2 0 54.6 LQ ( 50 ) 1 1 0 2 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 1 66.7 LQ Zhang, Greve ( 51 ) 1 2 1 2 0 N/A 2 2 2 2 2 1 77.3 MQ Robert-Lachaine, Mecheri ( 22 ) 2 2 1 2 0 N/A 2 2 2 1 1 2 77.3 MQ Chalimourdas, Dimitriadis ( 52 ) 1 2 1 2 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 66.7 LQ Bailey, Uchida ( 53 ) 2 2 2 2 2 N/A 2 2 2 2 2 2 100 HQ Brice, Hurley ( 54 ) 1 1 0 2 1 N/A 0 1 2 2 1 1 54.6 LQ Brice, Phillips ( 55 ) 2 0 1 2 2 N/A 1 2 2 2 2 2 81.8 MQ Brouwer, Yeung ( 56 ) 2 1 0 2 0 N/A 2 2 1 1 2 2 68.2 LQ Dahl, Dunford ( 57 ) 1 1 1 1 0 N/A 2 2 2 2 1 1 63.6 LQ Kim, Burket Koltsov ( 15 ) 1 1 2 2 2 N/A 0 1 2 2 2 1 72.7 MQ Punchihewa, Miyazaki ( 58 ) 0 1 0 1 0 N/A 2 1 2 2 2 1 54.55 LQ van der Straaten, Bruijnes ( 59 ) 2 2 1 2 0 0 2 1 2 2 2 1 70.8 MQ Straaten, Timmermans ( 60 ) 2 2 1 2 0 N/A 2 1 2 2 2 2 81.8 MQ Table 4 Showing the data from each study used in the qualitative analysis. Statistical outcomes from studies reporting multiple values per metric per analysis were averaged prior to analysis, and all the original data is available in Appendix 3 Study Kinematic model Sensor fusion Sample Movement protocol IMU placement Gold standard IMU type and Hz Movement types and planes Validity outcomes Reliability outcomes Beange, Chan ( 10 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 15 healthy adults spine forward flexion, backward extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, and circumduction C7, T12, S1 Placed within custom marker clusters 10 camera Vicon system Xsens DOT, 60Hz Controlled: Sagittal, Controlled frontal, Controlled transversal, Lumbar - ICC: 1.0; Thoracic – ICC: 1.0 Trunk - ICC: 1.0 Lumbar - ICC: 1.0; Thoracic – ICC: 1.0 Trunk - ICC: 1.0 Lumbar - ICC: 1.0; Thoracic – ICC: 1.0 Trunk - ICC: 1.0 Lumbar – ICC: 0.79; SEM: 6.76; CV: 11.80; Thoracic – ICC: 0.77; SEM: 6.10; CV:30.76; Trunk - ICC: 0.86; SEM: 11.52; CV: 17.92 Lumbar – ICC: 0.75; SEM: 2.99; CV: 11.80; Thoracic – ICC 0.87; SEM: 3.31; CV: 10.72 Trunk – ICC: 0.83; SEM: 3.64; CV: 6.71; Lumbar – ICC: 0.86; SEM: 2.48; CV: 19.80; Thoracic – ICC 0.87; SEM: 5.10; CV: 10.72 Trunk – ICC: 0.92; SEM: 4.53; CV: 9.13; Aranda-Valera, Cuesta-Vargas ( 11 ) Reference pose-based N/A 20 symptomatic with axial spondyloarthritis Flexion/extension, lateral flexion, and rotation—Using standardized instructions Head and T3, Lower sacral and T12 Head strap and an adhesive baseplate UCOTrack ViMove system, Dorsavi, 12Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Lumbar – ICC: 0.79; r: 0.81; RMSE: 14.11; bias: 5.50 Cervical – ICC 0.98; r: 0.98; RMSE: 8.01; bias: -4.2 Lumbar – ICC: 0.94; r: 0.94; RMSE: 3.90; bias: -3.0 Cervical – ICC 0.87; r: 0.87; RMSE: 8.12; bias: -2.1 Lumbar – ICC: 0.63; r: 0.69; RMSE: 10.36; bias: 14.70 Cervical – ICC 0.91; r: 0.91; RMSE: 9.99; bias: 1.2 Matheve, De Baets ( 32 ) Reference pose-based N/A 20 healthy subjects standing bow, stance-to-sit-to-stance, lifting a box from the floor and placing a box on an overhead shelf L1, S1, femur Valedo®motion, version 1,2, 50Hz Controlled sagittal, Complex sagittal Lumbar - ICC: 0.91; SEM: 2.25; MDC: 6.50; Lumbar - ICC: 0.75; SEM: 1.98; MDC: 5.57 Michaud, Perez Soto ( 33 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 39 healthy subjects 10 repetitions of the American kettlebell swing first, and, after a resting period, deadlift L5 and T8 with belt and harness 8 camera OptiTrack FLEX system TT-IWS, STT Systems, 100Hz Complex sagittal Lumbar - RMSE: 2.86 Mjosund, Boyle ( 14 ) Reference pose-based N/A 18 people with LBP and 16 people without LBP Flexion, extension, right lateral flexion and left lateral flexion full ROM S2 and T12 with double sided tape 18 camera Vicon system ViMove, 20Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Lumbar – RMSE1.27 Lumbar – RMSE 0.88 O'Grady, O'Dwyer ( 34 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 40 people with axial spondyloarthritis Flexion, extension, lateral flexion, and rotation Lower sacral and T12, attached with baseplate attached to an adhesive strip ViMove, DorsaVi, 20Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Lumbar – ICC: 0.93; SEM: 7.04 Lumbar – ICC: 0.98; SEM: 2.86 Senington, Lee ( 35 ) Reference pose-based N/A 40 county-level cricket fast bowlers 6 maximal effort bowls T1, L1, S1 14 camera Vicon system THETAmetrix, 100Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Lumbar – r: 0.97; bias: 1.90–3.60 Lumbar – r: 0.95; bias: 3.20-4.0 Lumbar – r: 0.73; bias: -5.1-1.80 Wong and Wong ( 36 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 9 healthy subjects Lumbar flexion and rotation T1, T12, S1 with elastic straps 6 camera Vicon system Custom IMU, Hz N/A Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Controlled frontal Lumbar – r: 0.98; Thoracic – r: 0.98 Lumbar – r: 0.97; Thoracic – r: 0.78 Lumbar – r: 0.99; Thoracic – r: 0.89 Bailes, Johnson ( 31 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based N/A 17 subjects Six ROM tasks T1/T2, T12/L1, L5/S1, lateral thigh, with double-sided adhesive body-safe tape 14 camera Vicon system Lifeware Labs, LLC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 62.5Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Lumbar – ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 8.83; bias: -4.9- -1.8 Thoracic – ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 4.03; bias: -0.60- -0.50 Lumbar – ICC: 0.77; RMSE: 7.82; bias: -1.3-2.0 Thoracic – ICC: 0.56; RMSE: 8.49; bias: -1.30-2.0 Lumbar – ICC: 0.92; RMSE: 4.23; bias: -1.0-.20 Thoracic – ICC: 0.81; RMSE: 14.96; bias: -1.0-7.40 Lumbar - ICC: 0.72 Thoracic – ICC: 0.91 Lumbar - ICC: 0.83 Thoracic – ICC: 0.78 Lumbar - ICC: 0.89 Thoracic – ICC: 0.94 Beange, Chan ( 9 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 10 healthy adults Spine ROM tasks while standing: spine FF, and bilateral LB, AR, and circumduction C7, T12, S1, placed within custom marker clusters 11 camera Vicon system Xsens DOT IMUs, 60Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Lumbar – RMSE: 1.51 Thoracic – RMSE: 2.33 Trunk – RMSE: 2.38 Lumbar – RMSE: 1.68 Thoracic – RMSE: 2.19 Trunk – RMSE: 1.98 Lumbar – RMSE: 2.74 Thoracic – RMSE: 3.26 Trunk – RMSE: 3.48 Chang, Smith ( 37 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 12 subjects with and without spine pain A series of 25 box-lifts T12, S2, with double sided tape 19 camera Vicon system DorsaVi Version 6, 100Hz Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Lumbar – RMSE: 0.77, bias: -1.20 Lumbar – RMSE: 1.54; bias: -0.84 Franco, Sengupta ( 38 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 11 healthy participants Trunk flexion, trunk extension, trunk lateral flexion, cervical rotation and cervical flexion/extension S1, L1, T1, T6, head One attached with double sided tape, three attached to foam supports, one attached to headband 12 camera Qualisys system Avanti, Delsys inc., 74Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Lumbar – RMSE: 1.65; bias: 0.30-1.0; Thoracic – RMSE: 2.05; bias: 0.0-0.60; Cervical – RMSE: 2.60; bias: 0.40 Lumbar – RMSE: 2.40; bias: -1.0; Thoracic – RMSE: 2.20 Cervical – RMSE: 1.70; bias: 0.0 Graham, Dupeyron ( 39 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 30 LBP patients Trunk flexion-extension, rotation, and complex task T8, S2, using double sided tape HIKOB Fox IMU sensors (Meylan, France), 100Hz Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal Lumbar – ICC: 0.49; SEM: 1.15; Lumbar – ICC: 0.29; SEM: 1.15 Lumbar – ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.57 Lumbar – ICC: 0.88; SEM: 0.57 Lumbar – ICC: 0.71; SEM: 0.57 Bauer, Rast ( 27 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 22 healthy participants for validity and 24 participants for reliability ROM tests flexion, extension, lateral flexion Thigh, S2, L1, T1, mounted on plastic frame attached to skin with hydrogel tape Vicon mocap Valedo, 200Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Lumbar – RMSE: 4.25; COD: 0.98; Thoracic – RMSE: 5.85; COD: 0.95; Lumbar – RMSE: 1.85; COD: 0.99; Thoracic – RMSE: 2.70; COD: 0.99; Lumbar – CV: 6.9; Lumbar – CV: 3.0; Duc, Salvia ( 40 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Complementary filter-based 23 participants, mix of controls and patients who have suffered from cervical disc disease flexion/extension, right/left axial rotation and right/left lateral bending - amplitude and speed modalities Head and sternum, using dermatological patches 8 Camera Vicon system Physilog®, BioAGM, 200Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Cervical – CMC: 0.99 Cervical – CMC: 1.00 Cervical – CMC: 1.00 Cervical – ICC: 0.93; SEM: 10.48; Cervical – ICC: 0.97; SEM: 6.63; Cervical – ICC: 0.99; SEM: 6.98 Barreto, Peixoto ( 41 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based N/A 10 national level gymnasts Round-off back handsprings Developer recommendations from Xsens 15 camera Qualisys system Xsens MVN Link, 240Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Cervical – RMSE: 7.21; CMC: 0.98; Cervical – RMSE: 5.79; CMC: 0.54; Cervical – RMSE: 7.48; CMC: 0.85; Gil-Agudo, de Los Reyes-Guzman ( 42 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Kalman filter-based 1 healthy male head flexion-extension and lateral inclinations Trunk, the back of the head, the right arm, the forearm and the hand Codamotion system Xsens MTx, 25Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Cervical – r: 1.0 Cervical – r: 0.99 Humadi, Nazarahari ( 43 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 10 healthy subjects Manual handling tasks MTws Xsens suit, with double sided tape 8 camera Vicon system MTws, Xsens Technologies, 60Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Cervical – RMSE: 6.07 Cervical – RMSE: 4.50 Keidan, Ibrahim ( 44 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 14 healthy participants Neck movement while leaning forward T1 and head, with double sided tape and headband Delsys Trigno Avanti sensors, 74Hz Controlled sagittal frontal transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.86; Cervical – ICC: 0.85; Cervical – ICC: 0.91; Lee, Akhundov ( 45 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 26 participants 5 min computerized typing task Head and T4, with rigid plates 9 camera Qualisys system Biscuit, WithRobot, 10Hz (Wi-fi) and MMR-MetaMotionR, Mbientlab Inc, 100Hz (Bluetooth) Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Cervical – RMSE: 3.46; COD 0.75 (wi-fi); RMSE: 13.79; COD: 0.16 (Bluetooth) Cervical – RMSE: 3.91; COD 0.60 (wi-fi); RMSE: 9.07; COD: 0.13 (Bluetooth) Cervical – RMSE: 9.1; COD 0.57 (wi-fi); RMSE: 32.38; COD: 0.19 (Bluetooth) Morrow, Lowndes ( 46 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 6 surgeons Surgical task (SAGES/ACS, FLS Program, Los Angeles, CA, USA) Back of head, anterior sternum, and the lateral aspect of the bilateral upper-arms and forearms, with velcro straps 10 camera Raptor system Opal, 80Hz Complex sagittal Cervical – RMSE: 2.90 Nikkhoo, Niu ( 47 ) N/A Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 35 healthy adults Maximal ROM in sagittal and coronal planes Forehead and upper back, with inelastic strap iPod Touch, 6th generation, Apple Inc., USA Controlled sagittal Controlled transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.69; SEM: 2.47; CV: 10.98 Cervical – ICC: 0.77; SEM: 2.60; CV: 7.93 Raya, Garcia-Carmona ( 48 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 27 healthy participants consecutive flexion-extension, lateral flexion, and rotation movements Forehead and C7 or T4, with trap and double-sided tape Custom IMU, Hz N/A Controlled sagittal frontal transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.93; Cervical – ICC: 0.90; Cervical – ICC: 0.94; Riffitts, Oh ( 49 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 30 controls and fusion-patients 10 activities of daily living Head and T1-T3, with vest and strap 6 camera OptiTrack system 3-Space Bluetooth, Hz N/A Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.98; RMSE: 2.19; Cervical – ICC: 0.81; RMSE: 3.76; Cervical – ICC: 0.93; RMSE: 3.53; ( 50 ) N/A N/A 33 healthy participants Various angles across all planes Head, C7, and pelvis, with elastic straps or double-sided tape MyoMotion, Noraxon Inc, 200Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.85; SEM: 1.15; MDC: 3.19 Cervical – ICC: 0.87; SEM: 1.31; MDC: 3.63 Cervical – ICC: 0.96; SEM: 0.81; MDC: 2.24 Zhang, Greve ( 51 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 10 healthy subjects Surgery task and controlled uni-planar motions Head, sternum, T5, T10, with double sided tape 10 camera Vicon system XSens MTw, Xsens Technologies B.V, 100Hz Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Controlled frontal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.90; RMSE: 3.7; bias: -5.36; Cervical – ICC: 0.80; RMSE: 3.6; bias: 0.77; Cervical – ICC: 0.99; RMSE: 2.0; bias: 0.18; Cervical – ICC: 0.96; RMSE: 3.9; bias: 0.27; Cervical – ICC: 0.97; RMSE: 2.2; bias: -0.40; Cervical – ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 3.6; bias: -2.17; Robert-Lachaine, Mecheri ( 22 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based N/A 12 healthy participants Manual handling tasks and controlled uni-planar movements Xsens suit - feet, shanks, thighs, pelvis, sternum, head, scapulae, upper arms, forearms and hands 8 camera OptiTrack system MVN, Xsens, 30Hz Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Controlled frontal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal Cervical – RMSE: 0.5; Trunk – RMSE: 0.50; Cervical – RMSE: 1.4; CMC: 1.0; Trunk – RMSE: 1.3; CMC: 1.0 (ISB-model); Cervical – RMSE: 12.3; CMC: 0.84; Trunk – RMSE: 5.9; CMC: 0.93(Xsens -model) Cervical – RMSE: 1.0; Trunk – RMSE: 0.70; Cervical – RMSE: 1.5; CMC: 1.0; Trunk – RMSE: 1.5; CMC: 0.98 (ISB-model); Cervical – RMSE: 4.8; CMC: 0.94; Trunk – RMSE: 4.5; CMC: 0.70 (Xsens model) Cervical – RMSE: 1.0; Trunk – RMSE: 1.0 Cervical – RMSE: 3.0; CMC: 0.99; Trunk – RMSE: 3.6; CMC: 0.97 (ISB-model); Cervical – RMSE: 3.9; CMC: 0.98; Trunk – RMSE: 4.4; CMC: 0.95 (Xsens model) Chalimourdas, Dimitriadis ( 52 ) N/A N/A 36 healthy participants Flexion and extension, lateral flexion, and cervical rotations Forehead, sternal angle, with tape and elastic band DyCare® Lynx, 102.4Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Cervical – ICC: 0.72; SEM: 5.95; Cervical – ICC: 0.80; SEM: 3.99; Cervical – ICC: 0.63; SEM: 5.16; Bailey, Uchida ( 53 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Complementary filter-based 14 healthy young adults Five different gait trials Feet, shanks, thighs, pelvis, sternum, with straps 11 camera Vicon system Dot, Xsens, 60Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Trunk – ICC: 0.38; RMSE: 1.40; bias: -1.3-0.7; Trunk – ICC: 0.64; RMSE: 3.99; bias: -7.0-0.02; Trunk – ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 4.15; bias: -6.7- -0.52; Brice, Hurley ( 54 ) N/A Complementary filter-based 5 healthy recreational discus throwers 10 discus throws T3, mid PSIS, wrist 10 camera Vicon system I Measure U, 500Hz Complex transversal Trunk – RMSE: 11.0; bias: -7.77 Brice, Phillips ( 55 ) Reference pose-based Kalman filter-based 17 healthy adults Rotation of the torso in each anatomical plane C7, T2, T7, Sternum, Pelvis, with inflexible plastic boards 20 camera Vicon system IMeasureU BlueThunder V1.0, 500Hz Controlled sagittal Controlled frontal Controlled transversal Trunk – RMSE: 3.03; bias: -0.9- -0.4; COD: 0.98; Trunk – RMSE: 1.07; bias: -0.2- -0.1; COD: 1.0; Trunk – RMSE: 2.39; bias: 0.40–1.80; COD: 0.99; Brouwer, Yeung ( 56 ) Reference pose-based Proprietary or Black-box algorithms 10 healthy males Four sports motions, and uni-planar controlled motions Pelvis, T1, with 3D printed clip attached with double-sided tape 12 camera Vicon system IMU BlueThunder, IMeasureU, 100Hz Controlled sagittal Complex sagittal Controlled frontal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal Trunk - r: 1.0; RMSE: 2.6; COD: 1.0 Trunk - r: 0.97; RMSE: 3.0; COD: 0.95 Trunk - r: 1.0; RMSE: 2.5; COD: 1.0 Trunk - r: 0.97; RMSE: 3.7; COD: 0.82 Trunk - r: 0.99; RMSE: 4.2; COD: 0.99; Trunk - r: 0.99; RMSE: 4.9; COD: 0.98; Dahl, Dunford ( 57 ) N/A N/A 49 healthy adults Eight complex movements Sternum, base of lumbar, lower and upper legs, with straps 17 camera Qualisys system Opal Gen 2, APDM, 128Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Trunk – ICC: 0.61; RMSE: 5.03; bias: -3.15- -2.72; Trunk – ICC: 0.57; RMSE: 4.97; bias: -0.16-0.25; Trunk – ICC: 0.38; RMSE: 5.71; bias: -0.34-0.32; Kim, Burket Koltsov ( 15 ) Reference pose-based Complementary filter-based 36 professional and armature golfers Five “hard” golf swings T1 and L4 10 camera Cortex 9 system Custom IMUs, 100Hz Complex transversal Trunk – ICC: 0.94; r: 0.94; Punchihewa, Miyazaki ( 58 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based Complementary filter-based 8 male baseball players Baseball hitting Sternum, pelvis, hand, with double-sided tape 13 camera Vicon system SS-MS-HMA200G60, 250Hz Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Trunk – ICC: 0.63; RMSE: 2.69; bias: -8.66; Trunk – ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 1.83; bias: 1.42; Trunk – ICC: 0.98; RMSE: 1.49; bias: -1.08; van der Straaten, Bruijnes ( 59 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based N/A 20 healthy participants Single leg squat and sit to stand MVN user manual, attached with double-sided tape and secured with strap MTw Awinda, MVN, BIOMECH Awinda, Xsens Technologies, Hz N/A Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Trunk - ICC: 0.66; SEM: 0.50; MDC: 1.33 Trunk - ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.24; MDC: 0.68 Trunk - ICC: 0.61; SEM: 0.20; MDC: 0.53 Straaten, Timmermans ( 60 ) Anatomical coordinate system-based N/A 20 healthy participants Walking, forward lunge, sideward lunge, and stair ascending and descending MVN user manual, attached with double-sided tape and secured with strap MTw Awinda, MVN, BIOMECH Awinda, Xsens Technologies, Hz N/A Complex sagittal Complex frontal Complex transversal Trunk - ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.45; Trunk - ICC: 0.71; SEM: 0.36; Trunk - ICC: 0.59; SEM: 0.42; Evidence per region Lumbar region methodology For the lumbar spine, a total of 343 participants were included across the fourteen included studies (Table 4 ). Seven studies assessed controlled tasks, two assessed complex tasks, and five assessed both. Of the studies assessing lumbar spine kinematics, one employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations and thirteen used reference pose-based calculations. Regarding fusion algorithm, four used complementary filter-based approaches, and six employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. In four studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 12 to 200 Hz, with 100 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from DorsaVi (DorsaVi, Melbourne, Australia) and Valedo®motion (Hocoma, Zurich, Switzerland) (3 times each). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal plane ( 14 ), thereby the frontal ( 11 ) and transverse ( 6 ) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity ( 8 ), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE ( 9 ) and ICC ( 3 ). For test-retest reliability, ICC ( 5 ) and SEM ( 4 ) were most commonly reported. Lumbar region, evidence for validity - controlled movements Across nine studies (n = 150), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.79-1), and 5/7 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 0.77–14.11°, bias range − 4.9 to 5.5°). In the frontal plane, moderate evidence for validity in the lumbar region was identified through the eight included studies (n = 138). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.77-1), with 5/6 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 0.87–7.82°, bias range − 3.00 to 4.55°). Through four studies (n = 62), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the transversal plane for the lumbar region. The agreement metrics mode was excellent (range 0.63-1), and 2/3 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 2.74–10.36°, bias range − 1.0-14.7°). Lumbar region, evidence for validity - complex movements Between the four studies (n = 100) identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region, limited evidence for validity was identified (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.97–0.972), with 2/2 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 1.54–2.86°, bias range − 0.84–3.60°). Only one very low-quality study (n = 40) assessing validity was included for the frontal plane in the lumbar region ( 35 ). This agreement metric was excellent (0.95) and only bias was reported (3.20-4.0°). The same very low-quality study (n = 40) was the only included study for the transversal plane in the lumbar region ( 35 ), and the agreement metric was moderate (0.73), whereas only bias was reported (-5.10-1.80°). Lumbar region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements Across six studies (n = 142), conflicting evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.49–0.92), and 2/4 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 1.14–7.035°). Regarding reliability in the frontal plane, four studies (n = 92) provided moderate evidence for the lumbar region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.75–0.98), with 2/2 studies showing error < 5° (SEM range 2.86–2.99°). Similarly, moderate reliability evidence was identified for the lumbar in the transversal plane through three included studies (n = 62). This mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.86–0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 0.57–2.48°) Lumbar region, evidence for reliability - complex movements Five studies (n = 122) showed conflicting evidence for reliability in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.49–0.92), with 2/4 studies showing error < 5° (SEM range 1.14–7.035°). In the frontal plane, three studies (n = 72) yielded moderate evidence for reliability for the lumbar region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.75–0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 2.86–2.99°). Across three included studies for the transversal plane (n = 62), level of evidence was moderate for the lumbar region. The mode of these agreement metrics was good (range 0.86–0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 0.57–2.48°). One low-quality study reported an extremely low ICC value in the sagittal plane ( 39 ), which skewed the reliability evidence from moderate to conflicting. Thoracic region methodology For the thoracic region, a total of 84 participants were included across the six included studies (Table 4 ). All studies assessed controlled tasks, while one also assessed complex tasks ( 36 ). Of the studies assessing thoracic spine kinematics, one employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations and five used reference pose-based calculations. Regarding fusion algorithm, two used complementary filter-based approaches, and four employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. The reported sampling rates ranged from 60 to 200 Hz, with 60 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands) and Valedo®motion (Hocoma, Zurich, Switzerland) (2 each). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal ( 6 ) and frontal ( 6 ) planes, and least in the transverse ( 3 ) plane. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity ( 5 ), and the most frequently reported validity metric was RMSE ( 4 ). For test-retest reliability, ICC ( 2 ) was the most commonly reported. Thoracic region, evidence for validity - controlled movements Across six studies (n = 84), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.95-1), and 3/4 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 2.05–5.85°, bias range − 0.6–0.6). For the frontal plane in the thoracic region, six included studies (n = 84) showed moderate evidence for validity. Mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.56-1), with 3/4 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 2.19–8.49°, bias range 2.19–8.49). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was also identified in the transverse plane for the thoracic region through three included studies (n = 42). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.81-1), error < 5° was found in 1/2 studies (RMSE range 3.26–14.96°, bias range 3.26–14.96). Thoracic region, evidence for validity - complex movements One very low-quality study (n = 9) assessed validity during complex movements in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region ( 36 ), and the agreement metric was classified as good (0.78). The other planes were not analyzed. Thoracic region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements Across two studies (n = 22), moderate evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.77–0.91), and 1/1 study showed error between 5–10° (SEM: 6.1°). Regarding the frontal plane, two studies (n = 22) yielded moderate evidence for the thoracic region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.78–0.87), with 1/1 study showing error < 5° (SEM: 3.31°). Likewise, from two studies (n = 22) in the transverse plane, moderate evidence for reliability was identified for the thoracic region. The mode of these agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.87–0.94), and 1/1 study yielded error between 5–10° (SEM: 5.1°). Thoracic region, evidence for reliability - complex movements No studies were identified. Cervical region Cervical region methodology For the cervical region, a total of 304 participants were included across the sixteen included studies (Table 4 ). Nine studies assessed controlled tasks, five assessed complex tasks, and two assessed both. Regarding joint angle calculations, seven employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations, six used reference pose-based calculations, and in three studies the modelling was not reported or could not be determined. Moreover, for fusion algorithm, three studies used complementary filter-based approaches, seven employed proprietary or black-box algorithms, and one used a Kalman filter-based approach. In five studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 10 to 240 Hz, with 100 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands, 5). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal plane ( 16 ), thereby the transverse ( 14 ) and frontal ( 13 ) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) and Qualisys (Qualisys, Gothenburg, Sweden) were the most commonly used reference systems for concurrent validity (3 each), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE ( 9 ) and CMC ( 4 ). For test-retest reliability, ICC ( 6 ) and SEM ( 4 ) were most commonly reported. Cervical region, evidence for validity - controlled movements From six included studies (n = 77), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.90–0.99), with 3/4 studies yielding error < 5° (RMSE range 0.5–8.01°, bias range − 5.36–0.40°). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was also identified from the five included studies (n = 66) in the frontal plane for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.87-1), and 2/3 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1-8.12°, bias range − 2.1–0.18°). Through five studies (n = 76), the transversal plane also had moderate evidence for validity for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.91-1), with 3/4 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 1-9.99°, bias range − 40 − 1.2°). Cervical region, evidence for validity - complex movements Across seven studies (n = 104), conflicting evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.80-1), and 3/7 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1.4-13.79°, bias 0.77°). For the frontal plane, the six included studies (n = 98) resulted in conflicting evidence for validity in the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.54-1), and 4/6 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1.5–9.07°, bias 0.27°). Regarding the transversal plane, five studies (n = 88) showed conflicting evidence for validity for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.85–0.99), and 3/5 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 3.0-32.38°, -2.17°). It should be noted that large heterogeneity in intra-study results from studies assessing differences between IMU types ( 45 ), and modelling approaches ( 22 ), skew these findings from moderate to conflicting evidence across all movement planes. Cervical region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements Through six studies (n = 168), conflicting evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was moderate, good, and excellent (range 0.69–0.93), and 2/4 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 1.15–10.48°). From the five studies assessing the frontal plane (n = 133), limited evidence for reliability was identified for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.80–0.97), with 2/3 studies showing error < 5° (SEM range 1.31–6.63°). Moreover, limited evidence for reliability in the cervical region was identified for the transversal plane from six studies (n = 168). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.63–0.99), and 2/4 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 0.81–6.98°). One trial in Duc, Salvia ( 40 ) involving high speed movements in the control group substantially increased the mean SEM value, indicating a potential outlier effect on the overall reliability outcome. Cervical region, evidence for reliability - complex movements No studies were identified. Trunk region Trunk region methodology For the trunk region, a total of 216 participants were included across the twelve included studies (Table 4 ). Three studies assessed controlled tasks, seven assessed complex tasks, and two assessed both. Regarding joint angle calculations, five employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations, five used reference pose-based calculations, and in two studies the modelling approach was not specified or could not be determined. Regarding fusion algorithm, four used complementary filter-based approaches, one used a Kalman filter-based approach, and three employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. In four studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 30 to 500 Hz, with 60 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands, 6). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the transversal plane ( 12 ), thereby the sagittal ( 10 ) and frontal ( 10 ) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity ( 7 ), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE ( 9 ) and ICC ( 4 ). For test-retest reliability, ICC ( 2 ) and SEM ( 2 ) were most commonly reported. Trunk region, evidence for validity - controlled movements Across five studies (n = 64), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the trunk region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 1–1), and 4/4 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 0.50–3.03°, bias range − 0.9- -0.4°). Moderate evidence for validity was identified for the trunk in the frontal plane from five included studies (n = 64). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 1–1), with 4/4 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 0.70–2.50°, bias range − 0.2- -0.1°). For the transversal plane, five studies (n = 64) yielded moderate evidence for validity for the trunk region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.99-1.00), and 4/4 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1.0-4.2°, bias range 0.40–1.80°). Trunk region, evidence for validity - complex movements From five studies (n = 93), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the trunk region (Fig. 2 ). The mode of agreement metrics was moderate and excellent (range 0.38-1), and 4/5 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1.3-5.0°, bias range − 8.66 − 0.07°). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was identified in the frontal plane for the trunk region from five studies (n = 93). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.57–0.98), and 5/5 studies showed error < 5° (RMSE range 1.5–4.97°, bias range − 7.0-1.42°). For the transversal plane, seven studies (n = 134) yielded moderate evidence for validity in the trunk region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.38–0.99), with 4/6 studies showing error < 5° (RMSE range 1.49-11.00°, bias range − 7.77–1.55°). Trunk region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements Only one study (n = 15) assessed reliability across all planes for the trunk region, yielding very limited evidence ( 10 ). For the sagittal plane the agreement metric was good (0.86), but reported error was > 10° (SEM 11.52°). In the frontal plane the agreement metric was good (0.83) and error was < 5° (SEM 3.64°), whereas in the transversal plane the agreement metric was excellent (0.92), and error was < 5° (SEM 4.53°). Trunk region, evidence for reliability - complex movements The same two studies (n = 40) were included for all planes in the trunk region ( 59 , 60 ). In the sagittal plane moderate evidence for reliability was identified, with the mode of agreement metrics being moderate (range 0.66–0.72) and 2/2 studies showing error < 5° (SEM range 0.45–0.50°). In the frontal plane the mode of agreement metrics was moderate (range 0.71–0.72), with 2/2 studies showing error < 5° (SEM range 0.24–0.36°). For the transversal plane the mode of agreement metrics was moderate (range 0.59–0.61) and 2/2 studies showed error < 5° (SEM range 0.20–0.42°). DISCUSSION This systematic review of 37 studies aimed to compile and assess the current literature on the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of IMUs for deriving inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the entire trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of the recent ISB guidelines ( 7 ). The main findings were that IMUs generally demonstrated moderate evidence of acceptable concurrent validity during controlled movements across all anatomical planes and regions (Fig. 2 ). In contrast, validity in complex movements was less consistent, more dependent on spinal region and movement plane, and lacking sufficient data for the lumbar and thoracic regions, which limited the ability to draw firm conclusions. For test-retest reliability in controlled movements, evidence varied and appeared dependent on both anatomical plane and region. In the sagittal plane in particular, the lumbar and cervical regions showed conflicting evidence, as both agreement and error metrics varied considerably between studies. Notably, both these analyses included significant outliers of lower methodological quality, which combined with the small number of reliability studies shifted the evidence from moderate support for acceptable reliability to conflicting. Regarding reliability in complex movements, the trunk showed moderate evidence for moderate agreement and error < 5 °, whereas insufficient data and conflicting evidence made conclusions difficult in the other regions. As this is the first systematic review to categorize IMU performance for spinal analysis into four distinct regions, direct comparisons with previous reviews are challenging. Nevertheless, the overall direction of findings remains largely consistent, with a few exceptions. In controlled movements, our results align with a previous systematic review reporting good to excellent validity and reliability for lumbar kinematics ( 12 ). However, McClintock, Callaway ( 12 ) reported greater validity and reliability for complex movements. This discrepancy might stem from methodological differences and timing of data extraction. McClintock, Callaway ( 12 ) did not specify criteria for sensor placement in their lumbar analysis, and some of their studies ( 54 , 55 ) are categorized as trunk-studies in the current review. Furthermore, while McClintock, Callaway ( 12 ) averaged results across movement planes for complex movements, this review analyzed each plane separately. One study contributing to conflicting evidence in the sagittal plane for reliability, Graham, Dupeyron ( 39 ), was also excluded from their analysis of complex movements. Finally, differences in inclusion criteria and the inclusion of studies published after 2022 in this review, may have contributed to the divergence in results. Similar to previous reviews, we discovered acceptable validity for controlled movements in the cervical region ( 13 , 19 ), and less conclusive results for movements of higher complexity ( 19 ). For reliability, our findings were less conclusive than those of Poitras, Dupuis ( 19 ), possibly due to the inclusion of two post-2019 studies of low quality that contributed to conflicting evidence in the sagittal plane ( 47 , 52 ). Despite different definitions of trunk measurement, our findings are consistent with Poitras, Dupuis ( 19 ), showing acceptable validity in the trunk across movement planes. Our review extends these findings by separating movement types and demonstrating no differences between controlled and complex tasks. Regarding reliability, the direction of our findings was also similar to that of Poitras, Dupuis ( 19 ) for the trunk, though the limited number of reliability studies and methodological differences between reviews make direct comparisons difficult. As such, results from the current review are comparable to previous reviews, with a few exceptions likely induced by methodological differences. Previous studies have suggested that IMU performance may be reduced during movement in the transverse plane compared to other movement planes ( 11 , 19 ). In contrast, and consistent with McClintock, Callaway ( 12 ) for the lumbar region, our qualitative analysis did not reveal any systematic or meaningful reduction in evidence or IMU performance between the transverse and other planes across regions. Instead, anatomical region, task complexity, and lack of quality studies emerged as the primary factors for compromised outcomes in our analysis. For instance, the cervical region showed the greatest variability, possibly due to considerable methodological heterogeneity. Across cervical studies, 13 different IMUs were used, complex tasks ranged from prolonged desk work ( 45 ) to gymnastics ( 41 ), and modeling approaches were nearly evenly divided between reference pose-based and anatomical coordinate system-based methods. Combined with the lowest average study quality, this heterogeneity possibly contributed to the inconsistent findings in cervical analyses. Why IMU research encounter varying results Although results from the majority of analyzes were generally consistent, most of our analyzes still showed considerable variation between best to worst IMU performances for both validity and reliability. This further highlights the substantial dependency on methodology and sensor specification in IMU research ( 7 , 16 , 19 , 21 ). For example, in regards of movement protocols and -analyzes, the current review did not account for the timing, nor magnitude of ROM analyzed in the included studies. However, McClintock, Callaway ( 12 ) highlighted that focus on a single value at a specific point of time (e.g. peak ROM) could mask differences in movement behavior across time, potentially inflating estimates of performance. Additionally, agreement metrics such as ICC and CMC tend to appear higher in movements of larger ROM ( 30 ), while error metrics may seem disproportionately low in movements with smaller ROM. Although this is less relevant for controlled uni-planar movements, where protocols are standardized and focus on one primary movement plane, analysis of complex, multi-planar movements may be more affected. Since both the magnitude and timing of ROM often vary between movement planes in complex movements, analyses are frequently conducted in non-primary planes, which has been shown to reduce both validity and reliability ( 27 , 53 ). For example, Bailey, Uchida ( 53 ) assessed trunk kinematics during gait and observed both higher average agreement and error in the primary transverse plane (ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 4.15°) compared to the non-primary sagittal plane (ICC: 0.38; RMSE:1.40°). These findings emphasize the importance of considering ROM characteristics when interpreting results, especially from complex movements. Moreover, IMUs performed poorer for reliability than validity. This may be related to the smaller number of reliability studies, but also the inherent nature of test-retest assessment, which include both within and between session protocols. Between session testing, which requires sensor removal and reattachment, is prone to human error into sensor alignment that can introduce signal-variation between movement axes ( 10 ). For example, Beange, Chan ( 10 ) reported better agreement within sessions (ICC 0,87 − 0,94) than between sessions (ICC 0.63–0.79) in the lumbar region. Additionally, the three studies reporting MDC showed greater variation in between-session protocols (0.6–8.5°) compared to within-session protocols (0.4–4.1°) ( 32 , 50 , 59 ). Although misalignment errors can be reduced through sensor-to-segment calibration ( 61 ), such techniques can be difficult to implement due to the anatomical complexity of the spine ( 38 ). Therefore, researchers and clinicians should intentionally standardize attachment modalities and protocols to enhance the reliability of IMU performance. Moving on, considerable differences in biomechanical models and methods for deriving joint angles exist across studies. The extraction of meaningful joint angles requires anatomically derived joint rotation axes and standardized joint coordinate systems ( 7 , 62 , 63 ), which in the context of IMUs can involve various alignment procedures ( 7 , 61 ). Anatomical alignment is an important factor for both validity and reliability, as differing procedures can influence results ( 56 ). Unfortunately, and similar to Poitras, Dupuis ( 19 ) and Zeng, Liu ( 64 ), this review was unable to fully extract or analyze anatomical alignment procedures due to insufficient reporting in many studies. To still provide a meaningful representation of the literature, the joint angle calculation methods were categorized into two categories. The first, anatomical coordinate system-based, involves joint angles computed from the relative orientation between segment-fixed coordinate systems ( 7 ). The second, reference pose-based, refers to joint angles derived from the relative rotation between IMUs using a reference posture to add anatomical context ( 7 , 63 ). For the thoracic and lumbar regions, the reference pose methods were almost exclusively used, whereas methods were more evenly distributed across studies assessing the cervical and trunk regions. Although the reference pose method in many cases represents a practical simplification, it is prone to several limitations, and caution should be used when comparing between studies using different methods ( 7 ). For example, Robert-Lachaine, Mecheri ( 22 ) found discrepancies attributed to biomechanical model rather than measurement system, making it difficult to separate errors from orientation estimation and those from the chosen model. Thus, comparing results across studies remains challenging ( 61 ), and future research should follow the latest ISB guidelines to enable more meaningful inter-study comparisons ( 7 , 61 ). Furthermore, different types of sensor fusion algorithms are used in IMU-data processing, with the most common algorithms being Kalman and complementary filter based. Kalman filters rely on complex mathematical models, which can make them difficult to implement for non-professionals, while complementary filters offer a simpler alternative. The psychometric properties of IMUs are shown to vary between fusion algorithms ( 18 , 20 , 65 ), though differences are generally low in high quality experiments ( 18 , 65 ). However, performance is often dependent on axis of rotation ( 18 , 66 ), movement amplitude ( 18 , 20 ), parameter tuning ( 20 ), and if absolute or relative orientation is assessed ( 18 , 67 ). As such, various factors may impact both results and interpretation of fusion algorithms in different contexts. Many of our included studies use commercially available systems with proprietary or black-box signal processing software, so the user is often unaware of how the algorithm functions. As such, the reporting of sensor fusion specifications in the literature is highly variable, and similarly to previous reviews ( 21 , 26 , 64 ), we were unable to meaningfully compare the effect of different fusion algorithms. Regardless of algorithms and methodology, the accuracy of kinematic calculations depends heavily on the quality of raw data produced by the IMU ( 68 ). Hardware-related noise differences have been reported not only between different IMU brands, but even between individual units of the same product line ( 20 ). As such, context-specific selection of IMUs has been recommended for in-vitro applications ( 20 ), and this appears equally relevant for spinal kinematics. For instance, Lee, Akhundov ( 45 ) compared two commercially available IMU systems against an optoelectronic reference and reported substantial differences in performance during prolonged computer tasks in the cervical region (average r 2 0.64 vs. 0.16). The authors attributed distinct sensor-specifications of each IMU to the observed differences in performance, ultimately deeming one system unsuitable for the specific measurement context. Still, the variability reported by Lee, Akhundov ( 45 ) appears greater than expected, as Zhou, Fischer ( 68 ) observed more consistent performance across seven consumer-grade IMUs during gait analysis (r 0.94–0.99, RMSE 0.04–0.11). However, Zhou, Fischer ( 68 ) also reported noticeable differences in raw-data quality across systems, which enabled them to identify the system best suited for their intended purpose. Nevertheless, these findings underscore the importance of selecting an IMU system that has been validated for the specific context and task of interest ( 20 , 45 , 68 ). Limitations This study has several limitations that should be addressed. First, no restrictions were placed on sample demographics, which may introduce more heterogeneity across studies. Also, in the context of this study, optoelectronic motion capture systems were considered gold standard, though such systems are not without own limitations due to several factors ( 27 , 69 ). Moreover, only two studies were considered high quality. These studies were not in the same analysis pools, making the highest achievable strength of evidence moderate. Conclusion IMUs have the potential of deriving reliable and clinically valid spinal kinematics across all anatomical planes and regions, although their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Substantial heterogeneity in methodology and reporting makes it difficult to identify any main contributing factor to measurement error from the current literature. Moreover, a limited number of studies investigating complex movements and test-retest reliability restricts the ability to draw definitive conclusions regarding these aspects. To advance the field, future research should adhere to recent ISB guidelines to enhance standardization and transparency, while users should select systems and interpret findings with caution given the technology’s sensitivity to variation. Clinical and practical relevance For clinical and practical purposes, this review underscores two key points: 1) IMUs are capable of deriving clinically valid and reliable spinal kinematics across all spinal regions and anatomical planes, 2) however, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Therefore, while IMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to lab-based systems, their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols. Abbreviations Inertial measurement unit – IMU Activities of daily living – ADL International Society of Biomechanics – ISB Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis – PRISMA Intraclass correlation coefficients – ICC Pearsons correlation coefficient – r Root mean square error – RMSE Limits of agreement – LoA Coefficient of determination – r 2 Coefficient of multiple correlation – CMC Standard error of measurement – SEM Coefficient of variation – CV Minimum detectable change High quality – HQ Medium quality – MQ Low quality – LQ Very low quality - VLQ Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable Consent for publication Not applicable Availability of data and materials All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files]. Competing interest The authors have no competing interest Funding No funding was received Authors contribution A.H.G.: corresponding author, approved the author contributions of all listed authors, ensured that all listed authors have approved the manuscript before submission; AND design of methodology, data collection, interpretation of the data, analysis, creating figures, tables and supplementary material, and writing initial draft; AND approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. S.L.: design of methodology, interpretation of the data and analysis; AND revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. R.v.d.T.: design of methodology, interpretation of the data and writing initial draft; AND revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. Acknowledgements The authors would like to express their gratitude to Dr. Hallvard Nygaard Falch for his substantial contribution to the planning and methodological design during the early stages of this project References Cohen SP. Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Neck Pain. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2015;90(2):284-99. Ferreira ML, de Luca K, Haile LM, Steinmetz JD, Culbreth GT, Cross M, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990–2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet Rheumatology. 2023;5(6):e316-e29. Van Dillen LR, Gombatto SP, Collins DR, Engsberg JR, Sahrmann SA. Symmetry of Timing of Hip and Lumbopelvic Rotation Motion in 2 Different Subgroups of People With Low Back Pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2007;88(3):351-60. Clays E, De Bacquer D, Leynen F, Kornitzer M, Kittel F, De Backer G. The Impact of Psychosocial Factors on Low Back Pain: Longitudinal Results From the Belstress Study. Spine. 2007;32(2). Lindenmann S, Tsagkaris C, Farshad M, Widmer J. Kinematics of the Cervical Spine Under Healthy and Degenerative Conditions: A Systematic Review. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 2022;50(12):1705-33. Widmer J, Fornaciari P, Senteler M, Roth T, Snedeker JG, Farshad M. Kinematics of the Spine Under Healthy and Degenerative Conditions: A Systematic Review. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 2019;47(7):1491-522. Cereatti A, Gurchiek R, Mundermann A, Fantozzi S, Horak F, Delp S, et al. ISB recommendations on the definition, estimation, and reporting of joint kinematics in human motion analysis applications using wearable inertial measurement technology. J Biomech. 2024;173:112225. Hafer JF, Vitali R, Gurchiek R, Curtze C, Shull P, Cain SM. Challenges and advances in the use of wearable sensors for lower extremity biomechanics. J Biomech. 2023;157:111714. Beange KHE, Chan ADC, Graham RB. Investigating concurrent validity of inertial sensors to evaluate multiplanar spine movement. J Biomech. 2024;164:111939. Beange KHE, Chan ADC, Graham RB. Can we reliably assess spine movement quality in clinics? A comparison of systems to evaluate movement reliability in a healthy population. J Biomech. 2025;179:112415. Aranda-Valera IC, Cuesta-Vargas A, Garrido-Castro JL, Gardiner PV, Lopez-Medina C, Machado PM, et al. Measuring Spinal Mobility Using an Inertial Measurement Unit System: A Validation Study in Axial Spondyloarthritis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10(6). McClintock FA, Callaway AJ, Clark CJ, Williams JM. Validity and reliability of inertial measurement units used to measure motion of the lumbar spine: A systematic review of individuals with and without low back pain. Med Eng Phys. 2024;126:104146. Vasquez-Ucho PA, Villalba-Meneses GF, Pila-Varela KO, Villalba-Meneses CP, Iglesias I, Almeida-Galarraga DA. Analysis and evaluation of the systems used for the assessment of the cervical spine function: a systematic review. J Med Eng Technol. 2021;45(5):380-93. Mjosund HL, Boyle E, Kjaer P, Mieritz RM, Skallgard T, Kent P. Clinically acceptable agreement between the ViMove wireless motion sensor system and the Vicon motion capture system when measuring lumbar region inclination motion in the sagittal and coronal planes. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):124. Kim SE, Burket Koltsov JC, Richards AW, Zhou J, Schadl K, Ladd AL, et al. Validation of Inertial Measurement Units for Analyzing Golf Swing Rotational Biomechanics. Sensors (Basel). 2023;23(20). Cuesta-Vargas AI, Alejandro G-M, and Williams JM. The use of inertial sensors system for human motion analysis. Physical Therapy Reviews. 2010;15(6):462-73. Chia L, Andersen JT, McKay MJ, Sullivan J, Megalaa T, Pappas E. Evaluating the validity and reliability of inertial measurement units for determining knee and trunk kinematics during athletic landing and cutting movements. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2021;60:102589. Ricci L, Taffoni F, Formica D. On the Orientation Error of IMU: Investigating Static and Dynamic Accuracy Targeting Human Motion. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(9):e0161940. Poitras I, Dupuis F, Bielmann M, Campeau-Lecours A, Mercier C, Bouyer LJ, et al. Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review. Sensors (Basel). 2019;19(7). Caruso M, Sabatini AM, Laidig D, Seel T, Knaflitz M, Della Croce U, et al. Analysis of the Accuracy of Ten Algorithms for Orientation Estimation Using Inertial and Magnetic Sensing under Optimal Conditions: One Size Does Not Fit All. Sensors. 2021;21(7):2543. Walmsley CP, Williams SA, Grisbrook T, Elliott C, Imms C, Campbell A. Measurement of Upper Limb Range of Motion Using Wearable Sensors: A Systematic Review. Sports Medicine - Open. 2018;4(1):53. Robert-Lachaine X, Mecheri H, Larue C, Plamondon A. Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2017;55(4):609-19. Papi E, Koh WS, McGregor AH. Wearable technology for spine movement assessment: A systematic review. J Biomech. 2017;64:186-97. Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160. Kobsar D, Charlton JM, Tse CTF, Esculier JF, Graffos A, Krowchuk NM, et al. Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020;17(1):62. Li J, Qiu F, Gan L, Chou LS. Concurrent validity of inertial measurement units in range of motion measurements of upper extremity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Wearable Technol. 2024;5:e11. Bauer CM, Rast FM, Ernst MJ, Kool J, Oetiker S, Rissanen SM, et al. Concurrent validity and reliability of a novel wireless inertial measurement system to assess trunk movement. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2015;25(5):782-90. van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, the Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review G. Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine. 2003;28(12). Pasciuto I, Ligorio G, Bergamini E, Vannozzi G, Sabatini AM, Cappozzo A. How Angular Velocity Features and Different Gyroscope Noise Types Interact and Determine Orientation Estimation Accuracy. Sensors [Internet]. 2015; 15(9):[23983-4001 pp.]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4610477/pdf/sensors-15-23983.pdf. McGinley JL, Baker R, Wolfe R, Morris ME. The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2009;29(3):360-9. Bailes AH, Johnson M, Roos R, Clark W, Cook H, McKernan G, et al. Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Inertial Measurement Units to Measure Three-Dimensional Spine and Hip Kinematics During Clinical Movement Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2024;24(20). Matheve T, De Baets L, Rast F, Bauer C, Timmermans A. Within/between-session reliability and agreement of lumbopelvic kinematics in the sagittal plane during functional movement control tasks in healthy persons. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2018;33:90-8. Michaud F, Perez Soto M, Lugris U, Cuadrado J. Lower Back Injury Prevention and Sensitization of Hip Hinge with Neutral Spine Using Wearable Sensors during Lifting Exercises. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(16). O'Grady M, O'Dwyer T, Connolly J, Condell J, Esquivel KM, O'Shea FD, et al. Measuring Spinal Mobility Using an Inertial Measurement Unit System: A Reliability Study in Axial Spondyloarthritis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(3). Senington B, Lee RY, Williams JM. Validity and reliability of innovative field measurements of tibial accelerations and spinal kinematics during cricket fast bowling. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2021;59(7-8):1475-84. Wong WY, Wong MS. Trunk posture monitoring with inertial sensors. Eur Spine J. 2008;17(5):743-53. Chang RP, Smith A, Kent P, Saraceni N, Hancock M, O'Sullivan PB, et al. Concurrent validity of DorsaVi wireless motion sensor system Version 6 and the Vicon motion analysis system during lifting. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):909. Franco L, Sengupta R, Wade L, Cazzola D. A novel IMU-based clinical assessment protocol for Axial Spondyloarthritis: a protocol validation study. PeerJ. 2021;9:e10623. Graham RB, Dupeyron A, van Dieen JH. Between-day reliability of IMU-derived spine control metrics in patients with low back pain. J Biomech. 2020;113:110080. Duc C, Salvia P, Lubansu A, Feipel V, Aminian K. A wearable inertial system to assess the cervical spine mobility: comparison with an optoelectronic-based motion capture evaluation. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36(1):49-56. Barreto J, Peixoto C, Cabral S, Williams AM, Casanova F, Pedro B, et al. Concurrent Validation of 3D Joint Angles during Gymnastics Techniques Using Inertial Measurement Units. Electronics. 2021;10(11). Gil-Agudo A, de Los Reyes-Guzman A, Dimbwadyo-Terrer I, Penasco-Martin B, Bernal-Sahun A, Lopez-Monteagudo P, et al. A novel motion tracking system for evaluation of functional rehabilitation of the upper limbs. Neural Regen Res. 2013;8(19):1773-82. Humadi A, Nazarahari M, Ahmad R, Rouhani H. Instrumented Ergonomic Risk Assessment Using Wearable Inertial Measurement Units: Impact of Joint Angle Convention. IEEE Access. 2021;9:7293-305. Keidan L, Ibrahim R, Ohayon E, Pick CG, Been E. Multi-Planar Cervical Motion Dataset: IMU Measurements and Goniometer. Sci Data. 2025;12(1):13. Lee R, Akhundov R, James C, Edwards S, Snodgrass SJ. Variations in Concurrent Validity of Two Independent Inertial Measurement Units Compared to Gold Standard for Upper Body Posture during Computerised Device Use. Sensors (Basel). 2023;23(15). Morrow MMB, Lowndes B, Fortune E, Kaufman KR, Hallbeck MS. Validation of Inertial Measurement Units for Upper Body Kinematics. J Appl Biomech. 2017;33(3):227-32. Nikkhoo M, Niu C-C, Fu C-J, Lu M-L, Chen W-C, Lin Y-H, et al. Reliability and Validity of a Mobile Device for Assessing Head Control Ability. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering. 2020;41(1):45-52. Raya R, Garcia-Carmona R, Sanchez C, Urendes E, Ramirez O, Martin A, et al. An Inexpensive and Easy to Use Cervical Range of Motion Measurement Solution Using Inertial Sensors. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18(8). Riffitts M, Oh A, Alemu A, Patel V, Smith CN, Murati S, et al. Functional range of motion of the cervical spine in cervical fusion patients during activities of daily living. J Biomech. 2023;152:111528. Yoon TL, Kim HN, Min JH. Validity and Reliability of an Inertial Measurement Unit-based 3-Dimensional Angular Measurement of Cervical Range of Motion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2019;42(1):75-81. Zhang C, Greve C, Verkerke GJ, Roossien CC, Houdijk H, Hijmans JM. Pilot Validation Study of Inertial Measurement Units and Markerless Methods for 3D Neck and Trunk Kinematics during a Simulated Surgery Task. Sensors (Basel). 2022;22(21). Chalimourdas A, Dimitriadis Z, Kapreli E, Strimpakos N. Test - re-test reliability and concurrent validity of cervical active range of motion in young asymptomatic adults using a new inertial measurement unit device. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021;18(10):1029-37. Bailey CA, Uchida TK, Nantel J, Graham RB. Validity and Sensitivity of an Inertial Measurement Unit-Driven Biomechanical Model of Motor Variability for Gait. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(22). Brice SM, Hurley M, Phillips EJ. Use of inertial measurement units for measuring torso and pelvis orientation, and shoulder–pelvis separation angle in the discus throw. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching. 2018;13(6):985-92. Brice SM, Phillips EJ, Millett EL, Hunter A, Philippa B. Comparing inertial measurement units and marker-based biomechanical models during dynamic rotation of the torso. Eur J Sport Sci. 2020;20(6):767-75. Brouwer NP, Yeung T, Bobbert MF, Besier TF. 3D trunk orientation measured using inertial measurement units during anatomical and dynamic sports motions. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2021;31(2):358-70. Dahl KD, Dunford KM, Wilson SA, Turnbull TL, Tashman S. Wearable sensor validation of sports-related movements for the lower extremity and trunk. Med Eng Phys. 2020;84:144-50. Punchihewa NG, Miyazaki S, Chosa E, Yamako G. Efficacy of Inertial Measurement Units in the Evaluation of Trunk and Hand Kinematics in Baseball Hitting. Sensors (Basel). 2020;20(24). van der Straaten R, Bruijnes A, Vanwanseele B, Jonkers I, De Baets L, Timmermans A. Reliability and Agreement of 3D Trunk and Lower Extremity Movement Analysis by Means of Inertial Sensor Technology for Unipodal and Bipodal Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2019;19(1). Straaten RV, Timmermans A, Bruijnes A, Vanwanseele B, Jonkers I, Baets L. Reliability of 3D Lower Extremity Movement Analysis by Means of Inertial Sensor Technology during Transitional Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18(8). Vitali RV, Perkins NC. Determining anatomical frames via inertial motion capture: A survey of methods. J Biomech. 2020;106:109832. Wu G, van der Helm FC, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, et al. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion--Part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J Biomech. 2005;38(5):981-92. Wells D, Alderson J, Camomilla V, Donnelly C, Elliott B, Cereatti A. Elbow joint kinematics during cricket bowling using magneto-inertial sensors: A feasibility study. J Sports Sci. 2019;37(5):515-24. Zeng Z, Liu Y, Hu X, Tang M, Wang L. Validity and Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units on Lower Extremity Kinematics During Running: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med Open. 2022;8(1):86. Chen H, Schall MC, Fethke NB. Measuring upper arm elevation using an inertial measurement unit: An exploration of sensor fusion algorithms and gyroscope models. Applied Ergonomics. 2020;89:103187. Bergamini E, Ligorio G, Summa A, Vannozzi G, Cappozzo A, Sabatini AM. Estimating Orientation Using Magnetic and Inertial Sensors and Different Sensor Fusion Approaches: Accuracy Assessment in Manual and Locomotion Tasks. Sensors. 2014;14(10):18625-49. Picerno P, Cereatti A, Cappozzo A. A spot check for assessing static orientation consistency of inertial and magnetic sensing units. Gait & Posture. 2011;33(3):373-8. Zhou L, Fischer E, Tunca C, Brahms CM, Ersoy C, Granacher U, et al. How We Found Our IMU: Guidelines to IMU Selection and a Comparison of Seven IMUs for Pervasive Healthcare Applications. Sensors. 2020;20(15):4090. Leardini A, Chiari L, Croce UD, Cappozzo A. Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry: Part 3. Soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation. Gait & Posture. 2005;21(2):212-25. Supplementary Files Appendix1.pdf Appendix2.xlsx Appendix3.xlsx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 23 Apr, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 15 Aug, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 13 Jul, 2025 First submitted to journal 13 Jul, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7056827","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":501003145,"identity":"ce97d59d-0ea5-467b-97a5-4d2eea239be1","order_by":0,"name":"Andreas Gundersen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nord universitet - Levanger","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Andreas","middleName":"","lastName":"Gundersen","suffix":""},{"id":501003146,"identity":"9855f2cd-df4a-4d30-aac5-95801b3a1b14","order_by":1,"name":"Stian Larsen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nord universitet - Levanger","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Stian","middleName":"","lastName":"Larsen","suffix":""},{"id":501003147,"identity":"1774b1f7-99e4-4c78-86a8-ee3fdf99ee91","order_by":2,"name":"Roland van den Tillaar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nord universitet - Levanger","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Roland","middleName":"van den","lastName":"Tillaar","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-07-06 09:04:07","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":89664482,"identity":"6144c31b-7a75-458c-a9f9-2db1262b4c14","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:43:08","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":227823,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePRISMA chart of systematic review process\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/c0cf71e016761a9b9628f032.png"},{"id":89664484,"identity":"15d4c524-303c-450e-ba17-e0990139aa36","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:43:08","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":276056,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSummary of results from the qualitative analysis of concurrent validity and test-retest reliability for controlled and complex movements across the lumbar, thoracic, cervical, and trunk regions in the sagittal, frontal, and transversal planes. Agreement and error metrics for validity and reliability are presented, where agreement reflects the mode of agreement reported across studies, and error represents the number of studies reporting an average error \u0026lt;5°. Color coding reflects the strength of evidence for each result: Green = moderate evidence; Yellow = limited evidence; Orange = very limited evidence; Red = conflicting evidence; Grey = no evidence or insufficient data for analysis.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/7afddc757c3991ffe9b5800f.png"},{"id":89665394,"identity":"93c3a397-8228-4811-8b98-81228eb279fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:59:14","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2825935,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/ba5f7fb3-5458-4c7e-90bb-19f67bdf9164.pdf"},{"id":89664490,"identity":"035afce2-5ef1-4df6-8ce9-bfb6cf8fbc47","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:43:08","extension":"pdf","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":478486,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix1.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/5489941b1a179ea942a4aecf.pdf"},{"id":89664488,"identity":"27a47cb9-9d23-41cf-88d8-3ea0902b98cb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:43:08","extension":"xlsx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":16507,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix2.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/cf21c1b0f7c49e7d23ed71a5.xlsx"},{"id":89664715,"identity":"db89ff80-15ae-4c44-9ef3-0ff38abb9903","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-08-22 11:51:08","extension":"xlsx","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":169937,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix3.xlsx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7056827/v1/309e7d82c5773cbd1179b650.xlsx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review","fulltext":[{"header":"Key points","content":"\u003cp\u003eIMUs are capable of deriving clinically valid and reliable spinal kinematics across all spinal regions and anatomical planes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTherefore, while IMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to lab-based systems, their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eSpine pain is a leading contributor to disability worldwide (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The global prevalence estimates of lumbar and cervical pain are between 23–42% and 30%, respectively (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Though distinct spinal regions exhibit unique anatomical properties, the pain prevalence seem to involve similar and multi-factorial mechanisms (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), such as mechanical and psychosocial factors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Knowledge of spinal kinematics is thus essential for understanding and managing spinal pain and pathology (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, several cohorts assess spine motion to characterize movement patterns during clinical evaluations, sports performance, and activities of daily living (ADL). Methods for assessing spinal motion may vary depending on setting, spinal region, movement type, and population. In clinics, spinal motion is frequently tested through uni-planar movement tests, and measured by visual observation, inclinometers, or goniometers. Although inexpensive and non-invasive, these methods are limited by their inability to perform continuous and multi-planar analyses. For more comprehensive analyses, optoelectronic motion capture systems are considered the gold standard. However, these systems are expensive and confined to laboratory environments, reducing their accessibility and applicability to real-world situations. Therefore, alternative methods that overcome these limitations are needed to enable less restricted data collections.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInertial measurement units (IMUs) are portable and inexpensive body-worn sensors offering a promising solution for capturing the desired motion data. Although technical variations exist between manufacturers, IMUs estimate orientation through fusing data sampled by integrated accelerometers, gyroscopes, and often magnetometers. These orientation data can subsequently be processed to derive joint kinematics using various approaches (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). An increasing popularity of IMUs for assessing human kinematics is evident through their growing representation in recent biomechanical literature (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e). This development is justified by studies reporting acceptable validity and reliability across diverse protocols and populations (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR10 CR11 CR12 CR13 CR14\" citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e–\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e). However, dependencies on sensor placement, movement tasks and frequencies, and anatomical planes and regions are also evident in the literature (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR17 CR18\" citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e–\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, results have been shown to differ between fusion algorithms (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e), and kinematic modelling approaches (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, methodological nuances complicate the use of IMUs for biomechanical purposes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e), and failure to adhere correct procedures may lead to unreliable results (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn response to these methodological challenges, the International Society of Biomechanics (ISB) recently proposed guidelines for definition, estimation, and reporting of human joint kinematics using IMUs (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). Based on five categories - sensor characteristics and calibration, experimental protocol, kinematic model and calibration, joint kinematic analysis, and quality assessment - the recommendations aim to advance both the design and review of IMU research (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). Although several literature reviews have assessed IMU validity and reliability for spinal kinematics (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e), none have been conducted with access to the recent ISB guidelines. Moreover, previous reviews have focused separately on individual spinal regions, including the entire trunk (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), the lumbar spine (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e) and the cervical spine (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), while the thoracic spine remains unaddressed and no review has yet evaluated all spinal regions within a cohesive framework. Particularly given IMUs known dependency on methodology, anatomical region, and movement task (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), an updated and broader review merging the literature on validity and reliability in all spinal regions is warranted to clarify the potential for deriving IMU-based kinematics throughout the spine. This information may provide practitioners and researchers in both sports and clinical contexts an updated perspective on the use of IMUs for assessing spinal kinematics.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e Therefore, this systematic review aims to compile and assess the current literature on concurrent validity (compared to gold standard optoelectronic systems) and test-retest reliability of IMUs for inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of the recent ISB guidelines.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eSearch strategy\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA systematic search of the following databases was conducted from inception to 3rd of February 2025: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy is shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, and was designed to include terms in the categories IMU, spine, kinematics, and outcome. Minor technical adjustments were made to meet requirements for each database. Moreover, complementary searches were made in Google Scholar and previous relevant reviews were cross-referenced. Lastly, authors of restricted articles were contacted to request full-text access.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003esearch strategy terms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMU\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\" ( \"inertial measurement unit\" OR imu OR \"wearable sensor\" OR \"inertial sensor\" )\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSpine\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAND\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e( \"lumbar\" OR \"thoracic\" OR \"cervical\" OR \"spine\" OR \"spinal\" OR \"trunk\" OR \"torso\" OR \"thorax\" OR \"neck\" OR \"lower back\" OR \"lower-back\" OR \"upper back\" OR \"upper-back\" )\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKinematics\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAND\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e( \"motion\" OR \"range of motion\" OR \"kinematics\" OR \"kinematic\" OR \"movement\" OR \"joint angle\" OR \"kinetic\" OR \"kinetics\" OR \"flexion\" OR \"extension\" OR \"rotation\" )\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOutcome\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAND\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e( \"accuracy\" OR \"reliability\" OR \"validity\" OR \"validation\" OR \"gold standard\" OR \"motion capture\" OR \"optoelectronic\" OR \"marker based\" OR \"marker-based\" ) \"\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eInclusion and exclusion criteria\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInclusion criteria stipulated studies to: a) use at least a six-axis IMU (three-axis accelerometer and three-axis gyroscope), b) report relative angles between two or more IMUs, c) include statistical measures of test-retest reliability or concurrent validity compared to a gold standard optoelectronic motion capture system and present these values in tables, d) capture movement during either controlled clinical assessment tasks (flexion-extension, lateral flexion, and rotation) or during complex, multi-planar movements, e.g. sports-related actions or ADL, e) report data representing either a specific anatomical joint angle or rotation around a specified axis, with controlled clinical assessment data extracted from the primary plane of movement, f) report data for each spinal region individually. Studies were excluded if they were conference papers or book chapters, and not written in English or conducted on human subjects. Studies failing to meet these criteria were excluded.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMethodological quality\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e). Also, Study quality was assessed by the lead researcher (A.H.G) using a version of \u003cem\u003ethe Critical Appraisal of Study Design for Psychometric Articles\u003c/em\u003e, modified to specifically evaluate the psychometric properties of IMU studies (Appendix 1) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e). The checklist contains 12 items distributed across five main categories: (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) study question, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) study design, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) measurements, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) analyses, and (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) recommendations. Each item is rated either 2 (satisfactory), 1 (partially satisfactory), or 0 (unsatisfactory), resulting in a maximum score of 24. However, item six applies solely to reliability studies, resulting in a maximum score of 22 among validity studies. Based on score percentage, studies were categorized as high quality (85–100%), medium quality (70–85%), low quality (50–70%), or very low quality (\u0026lt; 50%) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eData extraction\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA custom excel spreadsheet was created to extract methodological parameters following the ISB reporting checklist for IMU studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e), along with relevant statistical outcomes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e). The full spreadsheet is available in Appendix 2 and includes: a) kinematic model, b) kinematic analysis, c) study information, d) IMU specifications, e) statistical outcomes. Metrics extracted for concurrent validity were: intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Pearsons correlation coefficient (r), root mean square error (RMSE), bias, upper and lower limits of agreement (LoA), coefficient of determination (r\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e), and coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC). The test-retest reliability metrics were ICC, standard error of measurement (SEM), coefficient of variation (CV), and minimum detectable change (MDC). While all data was extracted and available in Appendix 3, statistical outcomes from studies reporting multiple values per metric per analysis were averaged prior to analysis. All data from the included studies were extracted by the lead researcher (A.H.G).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eData pooling and analysis\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudies were pooled based on a multi-stage grouping of outcomes. As such, all studies were grouped as assessing either the lumbar, thoracic, cervical, or trunk regions. Outcomes were then dichotomized as assessing either validity or reliability, and separated into overarching outcome groups (movement plane and complex or controlled movement). Studies reporting data across multiple parameters were included in each relevant subgroup accordingly. Measurements focused exclusively on either the lumbar, thoracic, or cervical spine were classified accordingly, whereas studies evaluating the combined motion of the lower and upper back were categorized as trunk assessments. Controlled movements were defined as those performed controlled and confined to a single anatomical plane (sagittal, frontal, or transverse), whereas complex movements involved unrestricted and/or multi-planar motion. As validity is shown to decrease during analysis in non-primary movement directions (e.g. analyzing flexion/extension angles in lateral flexion trials) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e), only results from the primary rotation axes were analyzed for the controlled movements. Due to substantial heterogeneity in study methodology, a meta-analysis was not feasible. Therefore, the analysis was constrained to qualitative analysis only. The qualitative analysis evaluated the strength of evidence for validity and reliability in each spinal region, and the overall evidence was determined based on four criteria. These criteria were sample size and number of studies (imprecision), methodological quality (risk of bias), methodological and outcome similarities (indirectness), and alignment in results (inconsistency) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e). Thereby, the evidence was graded as either strong, moderate, limited, very limited, or conflicting (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e). Agreement metrics (e.g. ICC, r, and CMC) were considered as poor (\u0026lt; 0.5), moderate (between 0.5 and 0.75), good (between 0.75 and 0.9), or excellent (\u0026gt; 0.90) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e). To reflect a broader but still clinically meaningful interpretation of error, RMSE and SEM can be interpreted as clinically acceptable (\u0026lt; 5°), acceptable with caution depending on context (5–10°), and not acceptable (\u0026gt; 10°) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eShowing requirements for each level of evidence. Multiple (≥2 studies).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStrong evidence\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple high-quality studies with consistent results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eModerate evidence\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple studies, including one high quality or multiple studies of at least medium quality with consistent results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLimited evidence\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple studies, including one medium-quality or multiple studies of at least low quality with consistent results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eVery limited evidence\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne low-quality or medium-quality study or multiple very low quality with consistent results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eConflicting evidence\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMultiple studies providing inconsistent results, regardless of the methodological quality.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cp\u003eA total of 1287 studies were identified through the systematic database search (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Following duplicate removal and screening, 37 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included in this systematic review (Tables\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Of these, 21 studies examined complex movement tasks, and 23 tested controlled clinical tasks. Regarding movement planes, 35 studies analyzed joint angles in the sagittal plane, 30 in the frontal plane, and 27 in the transverse plane.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMethodological quality\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eScores ranged from 36.4\u0026ndash;100%, with two studies rated as high quality, sixteen as medium quality, thirteen as low quality, and six as very low quality (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Overall, studies scored highest on item four, with no study receiving a score of zero, and lowest on item five, where only six studies received a top score of 2.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuality assessment scoring of 37 studies. HQ (high quality), MQ (medium quality), LQ (low quality), VLQ (very low quality).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"15\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c12\" colnum=\"12\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c13\" colnum=\"13\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c14\" colnum=\"14\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c15\" colnum=\"15\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy information\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy question\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"4\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy design\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c9\" namest=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMeasurement\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"3\" nameend=\"c12\" namest=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnalyses\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRec.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c15\" namest=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ10\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ11\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQ12\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e%\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eQuality\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeange, Chan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e79.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAranda-Valera, Cuesta-Vargas (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e81.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMatheve, De Baets (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e83.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMichaud, Perez Soto (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e45.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMjosund, Boyle (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e81.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eO'Grady, O'Dwyer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e79.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSenington, Lee (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e37.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWong and Wong (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e36.4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBailes, Johnson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeange, Chan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e77.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChang, Smith (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e72.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFranco, Sengupta (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGraham, Dupeyron (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e62.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBauer, Rast (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDuc, Salvia (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e68.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBarreto, Peixoto (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e68.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGil-Agudo, de Los Reyes-Guzman (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40.9\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHumadi, Nazarahari (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e54.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKeidan, Ibrahim (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e62.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLee, Akhundov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e77.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMorrow, Lowndes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e59.1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNikkhoo, Niu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e37.5\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRaya, Garcia-Carmona (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e41.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRiffitts, Oh (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e54.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e66.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eZhang, Greve (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e77.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRobert-Lachaine, Mecheri (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e77.3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChalimourdas, Dimitriadis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e66.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBailey, Uchida (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrice, Hurley (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e54.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrice, Phillips (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e81.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrouwer, Yeung (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e68.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDahl, Dunford (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e63.6\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKim, Burket Koltsov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e72.7\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePunchihewa, Miyazaki (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e54.55\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003evan der Straaten, Bruijnes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e70.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStraaten, Timmermans (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c12\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c13\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c14\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e81.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c15\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMQ\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eShowing the data from each study used in the qualitative analysis. Statistical outcomes from studies reporting multiple values per metric per analysis were averaged prior to analysis, and all the original data is available in Appendix 3\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudy\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKinematic model\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSensor fusion\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSample\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMovement protocol\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMU placement\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGold standard\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMU type and Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMovement types and planes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eValidity outcomes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReliability outcomes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeange, Chan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15 healthy adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003espine forward flexion, backward extension, lateral bending, axial rotation, and circumduction\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eC7, T12, S1 Placed within custom marker clusters\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXsens DOT, 60Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled: Sagittal,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal,\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar\u003c/b\u003e - ICC: 1.0;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003eICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar\u003c/b\u003e - ICC: 1.0;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003eICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar\u003c/b\u003e - ICC: 1.0;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003eICC: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.79; SEM: 6.76; CV: 11.80;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.77; SEM: 6.10; CV:30.76;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.86; SEM: 11.52; CV: 17.92\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.75; SEM: 2.99; CV: 11.80;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC 0.87; SEM: 3.31; CV: 10.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.83; SEM: 3.64; CV: 6.71;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.86; SEM: 2.48; CV: 19.80;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC 0.87; SEM: 5.10; CV: 10.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.92; SEM: 4.53; CV: 9.13;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAranda-Valera, Cuesta-Vargas (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20 symptomatic with axial spondyloarthritis\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFlexion/extension, lateral flexion, and rotation\u0026mdash;Using standardized instructions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead and T3, Lower sacral and T12\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead strap and an adhesive baseplate\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eUCOTrack\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eViMove system, Dorsavi, 12Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003etransversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.79; r: 0.81; RMSE: 14.11; bias: 5.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC 0.98; r: 0.98; RMSE: 8.01; bias: -4.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.94; r: 0.94; RMSE: 3.90; bias: -3.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC 0.87; r: 0.87; RMSE: 8.12; bias: -2.1\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.63; r: 0.69; RMSE: 10.36; bias: 14.70\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC 0.91; r: 0.91; RMSE: 9.99; bias: 1.2\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMatheve, De Baets (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20 healthy subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003estanding bow, stance-to-sit-to-stance, lifting a box from the floor and\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eplacing a box on an overhead shelf\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eL1, S1, femur\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eValedo\u0026reg;motion, version 1,2, 50Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.91; SEM: 2.25; MDC: 6.50;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.75; SEM: 1.98; MDC: 5.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMichaud, Perez Soto (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e39 healthy subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 repetitions of the American kettlebell swing first, and, after a resting period,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003edeadlift\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eL5 and T8\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ewith belt and harness\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8 camera OptiTrack\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFLEX system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTT-IWS, STT Systems, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.86\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMjosund, Boyle (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18 people with LBP and 16 people without LBP\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFlexion,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eextension, right lateral flexion and left lateral flexion full ROM\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eS2 and T12 with\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003edouble sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e18 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eViMove, 20Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE1.27\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE 0.88\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eO'Grady, O'Dwyer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40 people with axial spondyloarthritis\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFlexion, extension, lateral flexion, and\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003erotation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLower sacral and T12, attached with baseplate attached to an adhesive strip\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eViMove, DorsaVi, 20Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.93; SEM: 7.04\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.98; SEM: 2.86\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSenington, Lee (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e40 county-level cricket fast bowlers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 maximal effort bowls\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1, L1, S1\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTHETAmetrix, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.97; bias: 1.90\u0026ndash;3.60\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.95; bias: 3.20-4.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.73; bias: -5.1-1.80\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWong and Wong (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9 healthy subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLumbar\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eflexion and rotation\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1, T12, S1\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ewith elastic straps\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCustom IMU, Hz N/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003esagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.98; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.98\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.97; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.78\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.99; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.89\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBailes, Johnson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e17 subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSix ROM tasks\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1/T2, T12/L1, L5/S1, lateral thigh,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ewith double-sided adhesive body-safe tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLifeware Labs, LLC, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 62.5Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 8.83; bias: -4.9- -1.8\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 4.03; bias: -0.60- -0.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.77; RMSE: 7.82; bias: -1.3-2.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.56; RMSE: 8.49; bias: -1.30-2.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.92; RMSE: 4.23; bias: -1.0-.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.81; RMSE: 14.96; bias: -1.0-7.40\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.72\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.91\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.83\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.78\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.89\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.94\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeange, Chan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 healthy adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSpine ROM tasks\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ewhile standing: spine FF, and bilateral LB, AR, and circumduction\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eC7, T12, S1, placed within custom marker clusters\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXsens DOT IMUs, 60Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.51\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.38\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.68\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.19\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.98\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.74\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.26\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.48\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChang, Smith (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12 subjects with and without spine pain\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eA series of 25 box-lifts\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT12, S2, with double sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e19 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDorsaVi Version 6, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003esagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 0.77, bias: -1.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.54; bias: -0.84\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFranco, Sengupta (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTrunk flexion, trunk extension, trunk lateral flexion, cervical rotation and cervical flexion/extension\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eS1, L1, T1, T6, head\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne attached with double sided tape, three attached to foam supports, one attached to headband\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12 camera Qualisys system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAvanti, Delsys inc., 74Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.65; bias: 0.30-1.0; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.05; bias: 0.0-0.60; \u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.60; bias: 0.40\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.40; bias: -1.0; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.20\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.70; bias: 0.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGraham, Dupeyron (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30 LBP patients\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTrunk flexion-extension, rotation, and complex task\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT8, S2, using double sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHIKOB Fox IMU sensors (Meylan, France), 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003esagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.49; SEM: 1.15;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.29; SEM: 1.15\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.88; SEM: 0.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.71; SEM: 0.57\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBauer, Rast (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e22 healthy participants for validity and 24 participants for reliability\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eROM tests flexion, extension, lateral flexion\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThigh, S2, L1, T1, mounted on plastic frame attached to skin with hydrogel tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVicon mocap\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eValedo, 200Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 4.25; COD: 0.98; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 5.85; COD: 0.95;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.85; COD: 0.99; \u003cb\u003eThoracic \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.70; COD: 0.99;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e CV: 6.9;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e CV: 3.0;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDuc, Salvia (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e23 participants, mix of controls and patients who have suffered from cervical disc disease\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eflexion/extension, right/left axial rotation\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eand right/left lateral bending - amplitude and speed modalities\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead and sternum, using dermatological patches\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8 Camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePhysilog\u0026reg;, BioAGM, 200Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e CMC: 0.99\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e CMC: 1.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e CMC: 1.00\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.93; SEM: 10.48;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.97; SEM: 6.63;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.99; SEM: 6.98\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBarreto, Peixoto (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 national level gymnasts\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRound-off back handsprings\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDeveloper recommendations from Xsens\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e15 camera Qualisys system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXsens MVN Link, 240Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 7.21; CMC: 0.98;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 5.79; CMC: 0.54;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 7.48; CMC: 0.85;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eGil-Agudo, de Los Reyes-Guzman (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKalman filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e1 healthy male\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ehead flexion-extension and lateral inclinations\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eTrunk, the back of the head, the right arm, the forearm and the hand\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCodamotion system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXsens MTx, 25Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003efrontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.99\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHumadi, Nazarahari (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 healthy subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eManual handling tasks\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMTws Xsens suit, with double sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMTws, Xsens\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTechnologies, 60Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 6.07\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 4.50\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKeidan, Ibrahim (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNeck movement while leaning forward\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1 and head, with double sided tape and headband\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDelsys Trigno Avanti sensors, 74Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003efrontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003etransversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.86;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.85;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.91;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eLee, Akhundov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e26 participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5 min computerized typing task\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead and T4, with rigid plates\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e9 camera Qualisys system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBiscuit, WithRobot, 10Hz (Wi-fi) and MMR-MetaMotionR, Mbientlab Inc, 100Hz (Bluetooth)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003esagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003efrontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003etransversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.46; COD 0.75 (wi-fi); RMSE: 13.79; COD: 0.16 (Bluetooth)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.91; COD 0.60 (wi-fi); RMSE: 9.07; COD: 0.13 (Bluetooth)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 9.1; COD 0.57 (wi-fi); RMSE: 32.38; COD: 0.19 (Bluetooth)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMorrow, Lowndes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 surgeons\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSurgical task (SAGES/ACS, FLS Program, Los Angeles, CA, USA)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBack of head, anterior sternum, and the lateral\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003easpect of the bilateral upper-arms and forearms, with\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003evelcro straps\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 camera Raptor system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOpal, 80Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.90\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eNikkhoo, Niu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e35 healthy adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMaximal ROM in sagittal and coronal planes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eForehead and upper back, with inelastic strap\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eiPod Touch, 6th generation, Apple Inc., USA\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.69; SEM: 2.47; CV: 10.98\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.77; SEM: 2.60; CV: 7.93\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRaya, Garcia-Carmona (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e27 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003econsecutive flexion-extension, lateral flexion, and rotation movements\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eForehead and C7 or T4, with trap and double-sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCustom IMU, Hz N/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal frontal transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.93;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.90;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.94;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRiffitts, Oh (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e30 controls and fusion-patients\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 activities of daily living\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead and T1-T3, with vest and strap\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e6 camera OptiTrack system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e3-Space Bluetooth, Hz N/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal Complex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.98; RMSE: 2.19;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.81; RMSE: 3.76;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.93; RMSE: 3.53;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e(\u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e33 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eVarious angles across all planes\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead, C7, and pelvis, with elastic straps or double-sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMyoMotion, Noraxon Inc, 200Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal Controlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.85; SEM: 1.15; MDC: 3.19\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.87; SEM: 1.31; MDC: 3.63\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.96; SEM: 0.81; MDC: 2.24\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eZhang, Greve (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 healthy subjects\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSurgery task and controlled uni-planar motions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eHead, sternum, T5, T10, with double sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXSens MTw, Xsens Technologies B.V, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal Complex sagittal Controlled frontal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.90; RMSE: 3.7; bias: -5.36;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.80; RMSE: 3.6; bias: 0.77;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.99; RMSE: 2.0; bias: 0.18;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.96; RMSE: 3.9; bias: 0.27;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.97; RMSE: 2.2; bias: -0.40;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 3.6; bias: -2.17;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRobert-Lachaine, Mecheri (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eManual handling tasks and controlled uni-planar movements\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eXsens suit - feet,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eshanks, thighs, pelvis, sternum, head, scapulae, upper arms,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eforearms and hands\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8 camera OptiTrack system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMVN, Xsens, 30Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 0.5; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 0.50;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.4; CMC: 1.0; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.3; CMC: 1.0 (ISB-model); \u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 12.3; CMC: 0.84; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 5.9; CMC: 0.93(Xsens -model)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.0; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 0.70;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.5; CMC: 1.0; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.5; CMC: 0.98 (ISB-model); \u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 4.8; CMC: 0.94; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 4.5; CMC: 0.70 (Xsens model)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.0; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.0; CMC: 0.99; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.6; CMC: 0.97 (ISB-model); \u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.9; CMC: 0.98; \u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 4.4; CMC: 0.95 (Xsens model)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eChalimourdas, Dimitriadis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e36 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFlexion and extension,\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003elateral flexion, and cervical rotations\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eForehead, sternal angle, with tape and elastic band\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDyCare\u0026reg; Lynx, 102.4Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003efrontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003etransversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.72; SEM: 5.95;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.80; SEM: 3.99;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.63; SEM: 5.16;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBailey, Uchida (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e14 healthy young adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFive different gait trials\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFeet, shanks, thighs, pelvis, sternum, with straps\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e11 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDot, Xsens, 60Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal Complex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.38; RMSE: 1.40; bias: -1.3-0.7;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.64; RMSE: 3.99; bias: -7.0-0.02;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 4.15; bias: -6.7- -0.52;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrice, Hurley (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e5 healthy recreational discus throwers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 discus throws\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT3, mid PSIS, wrist\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eI Measure U, 500Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 11.0; bias: -7.77\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrice, Phillips (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKalman filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e17 healthy adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eRotation of the torso in each anatomical plane\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eC7, T2, T7, Sternum, Pelvis, with inflexible plastic boards\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMeasureU BlueThunder V1.0, 500Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled frontal Controlled transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 3.03; bias: -0.9- -0.4; COD: 0.98;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 1.07; bias: -0.2- -0.1; COD: 1.0;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e RMSE: 2.39; bias: 0.40\u0026ndash;1.80; COD: 0.99;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBrouwer, Yeung (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eProprietary or Black-box algorithms\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 healthy males\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFour sports motions, and uni-planar controlled motions\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePelvis, T1, with\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e3D printed clip attached with double-sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e12 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMU BlueThunder, IMeasureU, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eControlled sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal Controlled frontal Complex frontal Controlled transversal Complex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 1.0; RMSE: 2.6; COD: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.97; RMSE: 3.0; COD: 0.95\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 1.0; RMSE: 2.5; COD: 1.0\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.97; RMSE: 3.7; COD: 0.82\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.99; RMSE: 4.2; COD: 0.99;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e r: 0.99; RMSE: 4.9; COD: 0.98;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eDahl, Dunford (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e57\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e49 healthy adults\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eEight complex movements\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSternum, base of lumbar, lower and upper legs, with straps\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e17 camera Qualisys system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eOpal Gen 2, APDM, 128Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.61; RMSE: 5.03; bias: -3.15- -2.72;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.57; RMSE: 4.97; bias: -0.16-0.25;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.38; RMSE: 5.71; bias: -0.34-0.32;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eKim, Burket Koltsov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eReference pose-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e36 professional and armature golfers\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eFive \u0026ldquo;hard\u0026rdquo; golf swings\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eT1 and L4\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e10 camera Cortex 9 system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eCustom IMUs, 100Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.94; r: 0.94;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003ePunchihewa, Miyazaki (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e58\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplementary filter-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e8 male baseball players\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eBaseball hitting\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSternum, pelvis, hand, with double-sided tape\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e13 camera Vicon system\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSS-MS-HMA200G60, 250Hz\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.63; RMSE: 2.69; bias: -8.66;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.95; RMSE: 1.83; bias: 1.42;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk \u0026ndash;\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.98; RMSE: 1.49; bias: -1.08;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003evan der Straaten, Bruijnes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eSingle leg squat and sit to stand\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMVN user manual, attached with\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003edouble-sided tape and secured with strap\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMTw Awinda, MVN, BIOMECH Awinda, Xsens Technologies, Hz N/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.66; SEM: 0.50; MDC: 1.33\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.24; MDC: 0.68\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.61; SEM: 0.20; MDC: 0.53\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eStraaten, Timmermans (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnatomical coordinate system-based\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eN/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e20 healthy participants\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eWalking, forward lunge, sideward lunge, and stair\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eascending and descending\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMVN user manual, attached with\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003edouble-sided tape and secured with strap\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eMTw Awinda, MVN, BIOMECH Awinda, Xsens Technologies, Hz N/A\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex sagittal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex frontal\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eComplex transversal\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.72; SEM: 0.45;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.71; SEM: 0.36;\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk -\u003c/b\u003e ICC: 0.59; SEM: 0.42;\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eEvidence per region\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar region methodology\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the lumbar spine, a total of 343 participants were included across the fourteen included studies (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Seven studies assessed controlled tasks, two assessed complex tasks, and five assessed both. Of the studies assessing lumbar spine kinematics, one employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations and thirteen used reference pose-based calculations. Regarding fusion algorithm, four used complementary filter-based approaches, and six employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. In four studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 12 to 200 Hz, with 100 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from DorsaVi (DorsaVi, Melbourne, Australia) and Valedo\u0026reg;motion (Hocoma, Zurich, Switzerland) (3 times each). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal plane (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e), thereby the frontal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e) and transverse (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e) and ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). For test-retest reliability, ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) and SEM (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) were most commonly reported.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar region, evidence for validity - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross nine studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;150), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.79-1), and 5/7 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 0.77\u0026ndash;14.11\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;4.9 to 5.5\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn the frontal plane, moderate evidence for validity in the lumbar region was identified through the eight included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;138). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.77-1), with 5/6 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 0.87\u0026ndash;7.82\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;3.00 to 4.55\u0026deg;). Through four studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;62), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the transversal plane for the lumbar region. The agreement metrics mode was excellent (range 0.63-1), and 2/3 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 2.74\u0026ndash;10.36\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.0-14.7\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar region, evidence for validity - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBetween the four studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;100) identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region, limited evidence for validity was identified (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.97\u0026ndash;0.972), with 2/2 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.54\u0026ndash;2.86\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.84\u0026ndash;3.60\u0026deg;). Only one very low-quality study (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40) assessing validity was included for the frontal plane in the lumbar region (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e). This agreement metric was excellent (0.95) and only bias was reported (3.20-4.0\u0026deg;). The same very low-quality study (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40) was the only included study for the transversal plane in the lumbar region (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e), and the agreement metric was moderate (0.73), whereas only bias was reported (-5.10-1.80\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross six studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;142), conflicting evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.49\u0026ndash;0.92), and 2/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 1.14\u0026ndash;7.035\u0026deg;). Regarding reliability in the frontal plane, four studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;92) provided moderate evidence for the lumbar region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.75\u0026ndash;0.98), with 2/2 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 2.86\u0026ndash;2.99\u0026deg;). Similarly, moderate reliability evidence was identified for the lumbar in the transversal plane through three included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;62). This mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.86\u0026ndash;0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.57\u0026ndash;2.48\u0026deg;)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLumbar region, evidence for reliability - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFive studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;122) showed conflicting evidence for reliability in the sagittal plane for the lumbar region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.49\u0026ndash;0.92), with 2/4 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 1.14\u0026ndash;7.035\u0026deg;). In the frontal plane, three studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;72) yielded moderate evidence for reliability for the lumbar region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.75\u0026ndash;0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 2.86\u0026ndash;2.99\u0026deg;). Across three included studies for the transversal plane (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;62), level of evidence was moderate for the lumbar region. The mode of these agreement metrics was good (range 0.86\u0026ndash;0.98), and 2/2 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.57\u0026ndash;2.48\u0026deg;). One low-quality study reported an extremely low ICC value in the sagittal plane (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e), which skewed the reliability evidence from moderate to conflicting.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic region methodology\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the thoracic region, a total of 84 participants were included across the six included studies (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). All studies assessed controlled tasks, while one also assessed complex tasks (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e). Of the studies assessing thoracic spine kinematics, one employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations and five used reference pose-based calculations. Regarding fusion algorithm, two used complementary filter-based approaches, and four employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. The reported sampling rates ranged from 60 to 200 Hz, with 60 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands) and Valedo\u0026reg;motion (Hocoma, Zurich, Switzerland) (2 each). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) and frontal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) planes, and least in the transverse (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) plane. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e), and the most frequently reported validity metric was RMSE (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). For test-retest reliability, ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) was the most commonly reported.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic region, evidence for validity - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross six studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;84), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.95-1), and 3/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 2.05\u0026ndash;5.85\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.6\u0026ndash;0.6). For the frontal plane in the thoracic region, six included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;84) showed moderate evidence for validity. Mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.56-1), with 3/4 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 2.19\u0026ndash;8.49\u0026deg;, bias range 2.19\u0026ndash;8.49). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was also identified in the transverse plane for the thoracic region through three included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;42). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.81-1), error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; was found in 1/2 studies (RMSE range 3.26\u0026ndash;14.96\u0026deg;, bias range 3.26\u0026ndash;14.96).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic region, evidence for validity - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOne very low-quality study (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;9) assessed validity during complex movements in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e), and the agreement metric was classified as good (0.78). The other planes were not analyzed.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross two studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22), moderate evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the thoracic region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.77\u0026ndash;0.91), and 1/1 study showed error between 5\u0026ndash;10\u0026deg; (SEM: 6.1\u0026deg;). Regarding the frontal plane, two studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22) yielded moderate evidence for the thoracic region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.78\u0026ndash;0.87), with 1/1 study showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM: 3.31\u0026deg;). Likewise, from two studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;22) in the transverse plane, moderate evidence for reliability was identified for the thoracic region. The mode of these agreement metrics was good and excellent (range 0.87\u0026ndash;0.94), and 1/1 study yielded error between 5\u0026ndash;10\u0026deg; (SEM: 5.1\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eThoracic region, evidence for reliability - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo studies were identified.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region methodology\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the cervical region, a total of 304 participants were included across the sixteen included studies (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Nine studies assessed controlled tasks, five assessed complex tasks, and two assessed both. Regarding joint angle calculations, seven employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations, six used reference pose-based calculations, and in three studies the modelling was not reported or could not be determined. Moreover, for fusion algorithm, three studies used complementary filter-based approaches, seven employed proprietary or black-box algorithms, and one used a Kalman filter-based approach. In five studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 10 to 240 Hz, with 100 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands, 5). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the sagittal plane (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e), thereby the transverse (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e) and frontal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) and Qualisys (Qualisys, Gothenburg, Sweden) were the most commonly used reference systems for concurrent validity (3 each), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e) and CMC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). For test-retest reliability, ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) and SEM (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) were most commonly reported.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region, evidence for validity - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom six included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;77), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.90\u0026ndash;0.99), with 3/4 studies yielding error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 0.5\u0026ndash;8.01\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;5.36\u0026ndash;0.40\u0026deg;). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was also identified from the five included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;66) in the frontal plane for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.87-1), and 2/3 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1-8.12\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;2.1\u0026ndash;0.18\u0026deg;). Through five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;76), the transversal plane also had moderate evidence for validity for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.91-1), with 3/4 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1-9.99\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;40\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;1.2\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region, evidence for validity - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross seven studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;104), conflicting evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.80-1), and 3/7 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.4-13.79\u0026deg;, bias 0.77\u0026deg;). For the frontal plane, the six included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;98) resulted in conflicting evidence for validity in the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.54-1), and 4/6 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.5\u0026ndash;9.07\u0026deg;, bias 0.27\u0026deg;). Regarding the transversal plane, five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;88) showed conflicting evidence for validity for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.85\u0026ndash;0.99), and 3/5 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 3.0-32.38\u0026deg;, -2.17\u0026deg;). It should be noted that large heterogeneity in intra-study results from studies assessing differences between IMU types (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e), and modelling approaches (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e), skew these findings from moderate to conflicting evidence across all movement planes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThrough six studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;168), conflicting evidence for reliability was identified in the sagittal plane for the cervical region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was moderate, good, and excellent (range 0.69\u0026ndash;0.93), and 2/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 1.15\u0026ndash;10.48\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom the five studies assessing the frontal plane (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;133), limited evidence for reliability was identified for the cervical region. The mode of agreement metrics was good (range 0.80\u0026ndash;0.97), with 2/3 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 1.31\u0026ndash;6.63\u0026deg;). Moreover, limited evidence for reliability in the cervical region was identified for the transversal plane from six studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;168). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.63\u0026ndash;0.99), and 2/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.81\u0026ndash;6.98\u0026deg;). One trial in Duc, Salvia (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e) involving high speed movements in the control group substantially increased the mean SEM value, indicating a potential outlier effect on the overall reliability outcome.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eCervical region, evidence for reliability - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNo studies were identified.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region methodology\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor the trunk region, a total of 216 participants were included across the twelve included studies (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). Three studies assessed controlled tasks, seven assessed complex tasks, and two assessed both. Regarding joint angle calculations, five employed anatomical coordinate system-based joint angle calculations, five used reference pose-based calculations, and in two studies the modelling approach was not specified or could not be determined. Regarding fusion algorithm, four used complementary filter-based approaches, one used a Kalman filter-based approach, and three employed proprietary or black-box algorithms. In four studies, the sensor fusion method was not reported or could not be determined. The reported sampling rates ranged from 30 to 500 Hz, with 60 Hz being the most frequently used, and the most commonly used IMUs were from Xsens (Xsens Technologies BV, Netherlands, 6). Joint angles were most frequently analyzed in the transversal plane (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e), thereby the sagittal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e) and frontal (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e) planes. Vicon (Vicon, Oxford, UK) was the most commonly used reference system for concurrent validity (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e), and the most frequently reported validity metrics were RMSE (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e) and ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). For test-retest reliability, ICC (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) and SEM (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) were most commonly reported.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region, evidence for validity - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAcross five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;64), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the trunk region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 1\u0026ndash;1), and 4/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 0.50\u0026ndash;3.03\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.9- -0.4\u0026deg;). Moderate evidence for validity was identified for the trunk in the frontal plane from five included studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;64). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 1\u0026ndash;1), with 4/4 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 0.70\u0026ndash;2.50\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.2- -0.1\u0026deg;). For the transversal plane, five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;64) yielded moderate evidence for validity for the trunk region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.99-1.00), and 4/4 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.0-4.2\u0026deg;, bias range 0.40\u0026ndash;1.80\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region, evidence for validity - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;93), moderate evidence for validity was identified in the sagittal plane for the trunk region (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The mode of agreement metrics was moderate and excellent (range 0.38-1), and 4/5 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.3-5.0\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;8.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0.07\u0026deg;). Moreover, moderate evidence for validity was identified in the frontal plane for the trunk region from five studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;93). The mode of these agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.57\u0026ndash;0.98), and 5/5 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.5\u0026ndash;4.97\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;7.0-1.42\u0026deg;). For the transversal plane, seven studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;134) yielded moderate evidence for validity in the trunk region. The mode of agreement metrics was excellent (range 0.38\u0026ndash;0.99), with 4/6 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (RMSE range 1.49-11.00\u0026deg;, bias range \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;7.77\u0026ndash;1.55\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region, evidence for reliability - controlled movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOnly one study (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;15) assessed reliability across all planes for the trunk region, yielding very limited evidence (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). For the sagittal plane the agreement metric was good (0.86), but reported error was \u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;10\u0026deg; (SEM 11.52\u0026deg;). In the frontal plane the agreement metric was good (0.83) and error was \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM 3.64\u0026deg;), whereas in the transversal plane the agreement metric was excellent (0.92), and error was \u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM 4.53\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eTrunk region, evidence for reliability - complex movements\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe same two studies (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;40) were included for all planes in the trunk region (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e60\u003c/span\u003e). In the sagittal plane moderate evidence for reliability was identified, with the mode of agreement metrics being moderate (range 0.66\u0026ndash;0.72) and 2/2 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.45\u0026ndash;0.50\u0026deg;). In the frontal plane the mode of agreement metrics was moderate (range 0.71\u0026ndash;0.72), with 2/2 studies showing error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.24\u0026ndash;0.36\u0026deg;). For the transversal plane the mode of agreement metrics was moderate (range 0.59\u0026ndash;0.61) and 2/2 studies showed error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5\u0026deg; (SEM range 0.20\u0026ndash;0.42\u0026deg;).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis systematic review of 37 studies aimed to compile and assess the current literature on the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of IMUs for deriving inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the entire trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of the recent ISB guidelines (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). The main findings were that IMUs generally demonstrated moderate evidence of acceptable concurrent validity during controlled movements across all anatomical planes and regions (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, validity in complex movements was less consistent, more dependent on spinal region and movement plane, and lacking sufficient data for the lumbar and thoracic regions, which limited the ability to draw firm conclusions. For test-retest reliability in controlled movements, evidence varied and appeared dependent on both anatomical plane and region. In the sagittal plane in particular, the lumbar and cervical regions showed conflicting evidence, as both agreement and error metrics varied considerably between studies. Notably, both these analyses included significant outliers of lower methodological quality, which combined with the small number of reliability studies shifted the evidence from moderate support for acceptable reliability to conflicting. Regarding reliability in complex movements, the trunk showed moderate evidence for moderate agreement and error\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;5 \u0026deg;, whereas insufficient data and conflicting evidence made conclusions difficult in the other regions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs this is the first systematic review to categorize IMU performance for spinal analysis into four distinct regions, direct comparisons with previous reviews are challenging. Nevertheless, the overall direction of findings remains largely consistent, with a few exceptions. In controlled movements, our results align with a previous systematic review reporting good to excellent validity and reliability for lumbar kinematics (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e). However, McClintock, Callaway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) reported greater validity and reliability for complex movements. This discrepancy might stem from methodological differences and timing of data extraction. McClintock, Callaway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) did not specify criteria for sensor placement in their lumbar analysis, and some of their studies (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e54\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e55\u003c/span\u003e) are categorized as trunk-studies in the current review. Furthermore, while McClintock, Callaway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) averaged results across movement planes for complex movements, this review analyzed each plane separately. One study contributing to conflicting evidence in the sagittal plane for reliability, Graham, Dupeyron (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e), was also excluded from their analysis of complex movements. Finally, differences in inclusion criteria and the inclusion of studies published after 2022 in this review, may have contributed to the divergence in results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilar to previous reviews, we discovered acceptable validity for controlled movements in the cervical region (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), and less conclusive results for movements of higher complexity (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e). For reliability, our findings were less conclusive than those of Poitras, Dupuis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), possibly due to the inclusion of two post-2019 studies of low quality that contributed to conflicting evidence in the sagittal plane (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e). Despite different definitions of trunk measurement, our findings are consistent with Poitras, Dupuis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e), showing acceptable validity in the trunk across movement planes. Our review extends these findings by separating movement types and demonstrating no differences between controlled and complex tasks. Regarding reliability, the direction of our findings was also similar to that of Poitras, Dupuis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e) for the trunk, though the limited number of reliability studies and methodological differences between reviews make direct comparisons difficult. As such, results from the current review are comparable to previous reviews, with a few exceptions likely induced by methodological differences.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePrevious studies have suggested that IMU performance may be reduced during movement in the transverse plane compared to other movement planes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e). In contrast, and consistent with McClintock, Callaway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) for the lumbar region, our qualitative analysis did not reveal any systematic or meaningful reduction in evidence or IMU performance between the transverse and other planes across regions. Instead, anatomical region, task complexity, and lack of quality studies emerged as the primary factors for compromised outcomes in our analysis. For instance, the cervical region showed the greatest variability, possibly due to considerable methodological heterogeneity. Across cervical studies, 13 different IMUs were used, complex tasks ranged from prolonged desk work (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e) to gymnastics (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e), and modeling approaches were nearly evenly divided between reference pose-based and anatomical coordinate system-based methods. Combined with the lowest average study quality, this heterogeneity possibly contributed to the inconsistent findings in cervical analyses.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eWhy IMU research encounter varying results\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough results from the majority of analyzes were generally consistent, most of our analyzes still showed considerable variation between best to worst IMU performances for both validity and reliability. This further highlights the substantial dependency on methodology and sensor specification in IMU research (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e). For example, in regards of movement protocols and -analyzes, the current review did not account for the timing, nor magnitude of ROM analyzed in the included studies. However, McClintock, Callaway (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) highlighted that focus on a single value at a specific point of time (e.g. peak ROM) could mask differences in movement behavior across time, potentially inflating estimates of performance. Additionally, agreement metrics such as ICC and CMC tend to appear higher in movements of larger ROM (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e), while error metrics may seem disproportionately low in movements with smaller ROM. Although this is less relevant for controlled uni-planar movements, where protocols are standardized and focus on one primary movement plane, analysis of complex, multi-planar movements may be more affected. Since both the magnitude and timing of ROM often vary between movement planes in complex movements, analyses are frequently conducted in non-primary planes, which has been shown to reduce both validity and reliability (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Bailey, Uchida (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e53\u003c/span\u003e) assessed trunk kinematics during gait and observed both higher average agreement and error in the primary transverse plane (ICC: 0.83; RMSE: 4.15\u0026deg;) compared to the non-primary sagittal plane (ICC: 0.38; RMSE:1.40\u0026deg;). These findings emphasize the importance of considering ROM characteristics when interpreting results, especially from complex movements.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, IMUs performed poorer for reliability than validity. This may be related to the smaller number of reliability studies, but also the inherent nature of test-retest assessment, which include both within and between session protocols. Between session testing, which requires sensor removal and reattachment, is prone to human error into sensor alignment that can introduce signal-variation between movement axes (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Beange, Chan (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e) reported better agreement within sessions (ICC 0,87\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;0,94) than between sessions (ICC 0.63\u0026ndash;0.79) in the lumbar region. Additionally, the three studies reporting MDC showed greater variation in between-session protocols (0.6\u0026ndash;8.5\u0026deg;) compared to within-session protocols (0.4\u0026ndash;4.1\u0026deg;) (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e59\u003c/span\u003e). Although misalignment errors can be reduced through sensor-to-segment calibration (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e), such techniques can be difficult to implement due to the anatomical complexity of the spine (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, researchers and clinicians should intentionally standardize attachment modalities and protocols to enhance the reliability of IMU performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoving on, considerable differences in biomechanical models and methods for deriving joint angles exist across studies. The extraction of meaningful joint angles requires anatomically derived joint rotation axes and standardized joint coordinate systems (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e62\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e), which in the context of IMUs can involve various alignment procedures (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e). Anatomical alignment is an important factor for both validity and reliability, as differing procedures can influence results (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e56\u003c/span\u003e). Unfortunately, and similar to Poitras, Dupuis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e) and Zeng, Liu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e), this review was unable to fully extract or analyze anatomical alignment procedures due to insufficient reporting in many studies. To still provide a meaningful representation of the literature, the joint angle calculation methods were categorized into two categories. The first, anatomical coordinate system-based, involves joint angles computed from the relative orientation between segment-fixed coordinate systems (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). The second, reference pose-based, refers to joint angles derived from the relative rotation between IMUs using a reference posture to add anatomical context (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e63\u003c/span\u003e). For the thoracic and lumbar regions, the reference pose methods were almost exclusively used, whereas methods were more evenly distributed across studies assessing the cervical and trunk regions. Although the reference pose method in many cases represents a practical simplification, it is prone to several limitations, and caution should be used when comparing between studies using different methods (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). For example, Robert-Lachaine, Mecheri (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e) found discrepancies attributed to biomechanical model rather than measurement system, making it difficult to separate errors from orientation estimation and those from the chosen model. Thus, comparing results across studies remains challenging (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e), and future research should follow the latest ISB guidelines to enable more meaningful inter-study comparisons (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e61\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, different types of sensor fusion algorithms are used in IMU-data processing, with the most common algorithms being Kalman and complementary filter based. Kalman filters rely on complex mathematical models, which can make them difficult to implement for non-professionals, while complementary filters offer a simpler alternative. The psychometric properties of IMUs are shown to vary between fusion algorithms (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e), though differences are generally low in high quality experiments (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e65\u003c/span\u003e). However, performance is often dependent on axis of rotation (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e66\u003c/span\u003e), movement amplitude (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e), parameter tuning (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e), and if absolute or relative orientation is assessed (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e67\u003c/span\u003e). As such, various factors may impact both results and interpretation of fusion algorithms in different contexts. Many of our included studies use commercially available systems with proprietary or black-box signal processing software, so the user is often unaware of how the algorithm functions. As such, the reporting of sensor fusion specifications in the literature is highly variable, and similarly to previous reviews (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e64\u003c/span\u003e), we were unable to meaningfully compare the effect of different fusion algorithms.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegardless of algorithms and methodology, the accuracy of kinematic calculations depends heavily on the quality of raw data produced by the IMU (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e). Hardware-related noise differences have been reported not only between different IMU brands, but even between individual units of the same product line (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e). As such, context-specific selection of IMUs has been recommended for in-vitro applications (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e), and this appears equally relevant for spinal kinematics. For instance, Lee, Akhundov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e) compared two commercially available IMU systems against an optoelectronic reference and reported substantial differences in performance during prolonged computer tasks in the cervical region (average r\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e 0.64 vs. 0.16). The authors attributed distinct sensor-specifications of each IMU to the observed differences in performance, ultimately deeming one system unsuitable for the specific measurement context. Still, the variability reported by Lee, Akhundov (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e) appears greater than expected, as Zhou, Fischer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e) observed more consistent performance across seven consumer-grade IMUs during gait analysis (r 0.94\u0026ndash;0.99, RMSE 0.04\u0026ndash;0.11). However, Zhou, Fischer (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e) also reported noticeable differences in raw-data quality across systems, which enabled them to identify the system best suited for their intended purpose. Nevertheless, these findings underscore the importance of selecting an IMU system that has been validated for the specific context and task of interest (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e68\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eLimitations\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study has several limitations that should be addressed. First, no restrictions were placed on sample demographics, which may introduce more heterogeneity across studies. Also, in the context of this study, optoelectronic motion capture systems were considered gold standard, though such systems are not without own limitations due to several factors (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e69\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, only two studies were considered high quality. These studies were not in the same analysis pools, making the highest achievable strength of evidence moderate.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIMUs have the potential of deriving reliable and clinically valid spinal kinematics across all anatomical planes and regions, although their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Substantial heterogeneity in methodology and reporting makes it difficult to identify any main contributing factor to measurement error from the current literature. Moreover, a limited number of studies investigating complex movements and test-retest reliability restricts the ability to draw definitive conclusions regarding these aspects. To advance the field, future research should adhere to recent ISB guidelines to enhance standardization and transparency, while users should select systems and interpret findings with caution given the technology\u0026rsquo;s sensitivity to variation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Clinical and practical relevance","content":"\u003cp\u003eFor clinical and practical purposes, this review underscores two key points: 1) IMUs are capable of deriving clinically valid and reliable spinal kinematics across all spinal regions and anatomical planes, 2) however, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context. Therefore, while IMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to lab-based systems, their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Abbreviations","content":"\u003cul\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eInertial measurement unit \u0026ndash; IMU\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eActivities of daily living \u0026ndash; ADL\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eInternational Society of Biomechanics \u0026ndash; ISB\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePreferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analysis \u0026ndash; PRISMA\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIntraclass correlation coefficients \u0026ndash; ICC\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePearsons correlation coefficient \u0026ndash; r\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRoot mean square error \u0026ndash; RMSE\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLimits of agreement \u0026ndash; LoA\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCoefficient of determination \u0026ndash; r\u003csup\u003e2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCoefficient of multiple correlation \u0026ndash; CMC\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStandard error of measurement \u0026ndash; SEM\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCoefficient of variation \u0026ndash; CV\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMinimum detectable change\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHigh quality \u0026ndash; HQ\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMedium quality \u0026ndash; MQ\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLow quality \u0026ndash; LQ\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVery low quality - VLQ\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\n\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interest\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors have no competing interest\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo funding was received\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors contribution\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eA.H.G.:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ecorresponding author, approved the author contributions of all listed authors, ensured that all listed authors have approved the manuscript before submission; AND design of methodology, data collection, interpretation of the data, analysis, creating figures, tables and supplementary material, and writing initial draft; AND approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eS.L.:\u003c/strong\u003e design of methodology, interpretation of the data and analysis; AND revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eR.v.d.T.:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003edesign of methodology, interpretation of the data and writing initial draft; AND revised and approved the submitted version of the manuscript; AND have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors would like to express their gratitude to Dr. Hallvard Nygaard Falch for his substantial contribution to the planning and methodological design during the early stages of this project\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCohen SP. Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Neck Pain. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2015;90(2):284-99.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFerreira ML, de Luca K, Haile LM, Steinmetz JD, Culbreth GT, Cross M, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of low back pain, 1990\u0026amp;#x2013;2020, its attributable risk factors, and projections to 2050: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet Rheumatology. 2023;5(6):e316-e29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVan Dillen LR, Gombatto SP, Collins DR, Engsberg JR, Sahrmann SA. Symmetry of Timing of Hip and Lumbopelvic Rotation Motion in 2 Different Subgroups of People With Low Back Pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2007;88(3):351-60.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClays E, De Bacquer D, Leynen F, Kornitzer M, Kittel F, De Backer G. The Impact of Psychosocial Factors on Low Back Pain: Longitudinal Results From the Belstress Study. Spine. 2007;32(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLindenmann S, Tsagkaris C, Farshad M, Widmer J. Kinematics of the Cervical Spine Under Healthy and Degenerative Conditions: A Systematic Review. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 2022;50(12):1705-33.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWidmer J, Fornaciari P, Senteler M, Roth T, Snedeker JG, Farshad M. Kinematics of the Spine Under Healthy and Degenerative Conditions: A Systematic Review. Annals of Biomedical Engineering. 2019;47(7):1491-522.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCereatti A, Gurchiek R, Mundermann A, Fantozzi S, Horak F, Delp S, et al. ISB recommendations on the definition, estimation, and reporting of joint kinematics in human motion analysis applications using wearable inertial measurement technology. J Biomech. 2024;173:112225.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHafer JF, Vitali R, Gurchiek R, Curtze C, Shull P, Cain SM. Challenges and advances in the use of wearable sensors for lower extremity biomechanics. J Biomech. 2023;157:111714.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeange KHE, Chan ADC, Graham RB. Investigating concurrent validity of inertial sensors to evaluate multiplanar spine movement. J Biomech. 2024;164:111939.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeange KHE, Chan ADC, Graham RB. Can we reliably assess spine movement quality in clinics? A comparison of systems to evaluate movement reliability in a healthy population. J Biomech. 2025;179:112415.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAranda-Valera IC, Cuesta-Vargas A, Garrido-Castro JL, Gardiner PV, Lopez-Medina C, Machado PM, et al. Measuring Spinal Mobility Using an Inertial Measurement Unit System: A Validation Study in Axial Spondyloarthritis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10(6).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcClintock FA, Callaway AJ, Clark CJ, Williams JM. Validity and reliability of inertial measurement units used to measure motion of the lumbar spine: A systematic review of individuals with and without low back pain. Med Eng Phys. 2024;126:104146.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVasquez-Ucho PA, Villalba-Meneses GF, Pila-Varela KO, Villalba-Meneses CP, Iglesias I, Almeida-Galarraga DA. Analysis and evaluation of the systems used for the assessment of the cervical spine function: a systematic review. J Med Eng Technol. 2021;45(5):380-93.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMjosund HL, Boyle E, Kjaer P, Mieritz RM, Skallgard T, Kent P. Clinically acceptable agreement between the ViMove wireless motion sensor system and the Vicon motion capture system when measuring lumbar region inclination motion in the sagittal and coronal planes. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):124.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim SE, Burket Koltsov JC, Richards AW, Zhou J, Schadl K, Ladd AL, et al. Validation of Inertial Measurement Units for Analyzing Golf Swing Rotational Biomechanics. Sensors (Basel). 2023;23(20).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCuesta-Vargas AI, Alejandro G-M, and Williams JM. The use of inertial sensors system for human motion analysis. Physical Therapy Reviews. 2010;15(6):462-73.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChia L, Andersen JT, McKay MJ, Sullivan J, Megalaa T, Pappas E. Evaluating the validity and reliability of inertial measurement units for determining knee and trunk kinematics during athletic landing and cutting movements. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2021;60:102589.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRicci L, Taffoni F, Formica D. On the Orientation Error of IMU: Investigating Static and Dynamic Accuracy Targeting Human Motion. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(9):e0161940.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePoitras I, Dupuis F, Bielmann M, Campeau-Lecours A, Mercier C, Bouyer LJ, et al. Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review. Sensors (Basel). 2019;19(7).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCaruso M, Sabatini AM, Laidig D, Seel T, Knaflitz M, Della Croce U, et al. Analysis of the Accuracy of Ten Algorithms for Orientation Estimation Using Inertial and Magnetic Sensing under Optimal Conditions: One Size Does Not Fit All. Sensors. 2021;21(7):2543.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWalmsley CP, Williams SA, Grisbrook T, Elliott C, Imms C, Campbell A. Measurement of Upper Limb Range of Motion Using Wearable Sensors: A Systematic Review. Sports Medicine - Open. 2018;4(1):53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRobert-Lachaine X, Mecheri H, Larue C, Plamondon A. Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2017;55(4):609-19.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePapi E, Koh WS, McGregor AH. Wearable technology for spine movement assessment: A systematic review. J Biomech. 2017;64:186-97.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePage MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n160.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKobsar D, Charlton JM, Tse CTF, Esculier JF, Graffos A, Krowchuk NM, et al. Validity and reliability of wearable inertial sensors in healthy adult walking: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2020;17(1):62.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi J, Qiu F, Gan L, Chou LS. Concurrent validity of inertial measurement units in range of motion measurements of upper extremity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Wearable Technol. 2024;5:e11.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBauer CM, Rast FM, Ernst MJ, Kool J, Oetiker S, Rissanen SM, et al. Concurrent validity and reliability of a novel wireless inertial measurement system to assess trunk movement. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2015;25(5):782-90.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L, the Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review G. Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine. 2003;28(12).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePasciuto I, Ligorio G, Bergamini E, Vannozzi G, Sabatini AM, Cappozzo A. How Angular Velocity Features and Different Gyroscope Noise Types Interact and Determine Orientation Estimation Accuracy. Sensors [Internet]. 2015; 15(9):[23983-4001 pp.]. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4610477/pdf/sensors-15-23983.pdf.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcGinley JL, Baker R, Wolfe R, Morris ME. The reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2009;29(3):360-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBailes AH, Johnson M, Roos R, Clark W, Cook H, McKernan G, et al. Assessing the Reliability and Validity of Inertial Measurement Units to Measure Three-Dimensional Spine and Hip Kinematics During Clinical Movement Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2024;24(20).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMatheve T, De Baets L, Rast F, Bauer C, Timmermans A. Within/between-session reliability and agreement of lumbopelvic kinematics in the sagittal plane during functional movement control tasks in healthy persons. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2018;33:90-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMichaud F, Perez Soto M, Lugris U, Cuadrado J. Lower Back Injury Prevention and Sensitization of Hip Hinge with Neutral Spine Using Wearable Sensors during Lifting Exercises. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(16).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026apos;Grady M, O\u0026apos;Dwyer T, Connolly J, Condell J, Esquivel KM, O\u0026apos;Shea FD, et al. Measuring Spinal Mobility Using an Inertial Measurement Unit System: A Reliability Study in Axial Spondyloarthritis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSenington B, Lee RY, Williams JM. Validity and reliability of innovative field measurements of tibial accelerations and spinal kinematics during cricket fast bowling. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2021;59(7-8):1475-84.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWong WY, Wong MS. Trunk posture monitoring with inertial sensors. Eur Spine J. 2008;17(5):743-53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChang RP, Smith A, Kent P, Saraceni N, Hancock M, O\u0026apos;Sullivan PB, et al. Concurrent validity of DorsaVi wireless motion sensor system Version 6 and the Vicon motion analysis system during lifting. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):909.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranco L, Sengupta R, Wade L, Cazzola D. A novel IMU-based clinical assessment protocol for Axial Spondyloarthritis: a protocol validation study. PeerJ. 2021;9:e10623.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGraham RB, Dupeyron A, van Dieen JH. Between-day reliability of IMU-derived spine control metrics in patients with low back pain. J Biomech. 2020;113:110080.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuc C, Salvia P, Lubansu A, Feipel V, Aminian K. A wearable inertial system to assess the cervical spine mobility: comparison with an optoelectronic-based motion capture evaluation. Med Eng Phys. 2014;36(1):49-56.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarreto J, Peixoto C, Cabral S, Williams AM, Casanova F, Pedro B, et al. Concurrent Validation of 3D Joint Angles during Gymnastics Techniques Using Inertial Measurement Units. Electronics. 2021;10(11).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGil-Agudo A, de Los Reyes-Guzman A, Dimbwadyo-Terrer I, Penasco-Martin B, Bernal-Sahun A, Lopez-Monteagudo P, et al. A novel motion tracking system for evaluation of functional rehabilitation of the upper limbs. Neural Regen Res. 2013;8(19):1773-82.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHumadi A, Nazarahari M, Ahmad R, Rouhani H. Instrumented Ergonomic Risk Assessment Using Wearable Inertial Measurement Units: Impact of Joint Angle Convention. IEEE Access. 2021;9:7293-305.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeidan L, Ibrahim R, Ohayon E, Pick CG, Been E. Multi-Planar Cervical Motion Dataset: IMU Measurements and Goniometer. Sci Data. 2025;12(1):13.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee R, Akhundov R, James C, Edwards S, Snodgrass SJ. Variations in Concurrent Validity of Two Independent Inertial Measurement Units Compared to Gold Standard for Upper Body Posture during Computerised Device Use. Sensors (Basel). 2023;23(15).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMorrow MMB, Lowndes B, Fortune E, Kaufman KR, Hallbeck MS. Validation of Inertial Measurement Units for Upper Body Kinematics. J Appl Biomech. 2017;33(3):227-32.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNikkhoo M, Niu C-C, Fu C-J, Lu M-L, Chen W-C, Lin Y-H, et al. Reliability and Validity of a Mobile Device for Assessing Head Control Ability. Journal of Medical and Biological Engineering. 2020;41(1):45-52.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRaya R, Garcia-Carmona R, Sanchez C, Urendes E, Ramirez O, Martin A, et al. An Inexpensive and Easy to Use Cervical Range of Motion Measurement Solution Using Inertial Sensors. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18(8).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRiffitts M, Oh A, Alemu A, Patel V, Smith CN, Murati S, et al. Functional range of motion of the cervical spine in cervical fusion patients during activities of daily living. J Biomech. 2023;152:111528.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoon TL, Kim HN, Min JH. Validity and Reliability of an Inertial Measurement Unit-based 3-Dimensional Angular Measurement of Cervical Range of Motion. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2019;42(1):75-81.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang C, Greve C, Verkerke GJ, Roossien CC, Houdijk H, Hijmans JM. Pilot Validation Study of Inertial Measurement Units and Markerless Methods for 3D Neck and Trunk Kinematics during a Simulated Surgery Task. Sensors (Basel). 2022;22(21).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChalimourdas A, Dimitriadis Z, Kapreli E, Strimpakos N. Test - re-test reliability and concurrent validity of cervical active range of motion in young asymptomatic adults using a new inertial measurement unit device. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2021;18(10):1029-37.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBailey CA, Uchida TK, Nantel J, Graham RB. Validity and Sensitivity of an Inertial Measurement Unit-Driven Biomechanical Model of Motor Variability for Gait. Sensors (Basel). 2021;21(22).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrice SM, Hurley M, Phillips EJ. Use of inertial measurement units for measuring torso and pelvis orientation, and shoulder\u0026ndash;pelvis separation angle in the discus throw. International Journal of Sports Science \u0026amp; Coaching. 2018;13(6):985-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrice SM, Phillips EJ, Millett EL, Hunter A, Philippa B. Comparing inertial measurement units and marker-based biomechanical models during dynamic rotation of the torso. Eur J Sport Sci. 2020;20(6):767-75.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrouwer NP, Yeung T, Bobbert MF, Besier TF. 3D trunk orientation measured using inertial measurement units during anatomical and dynamic sports motions. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2021;31(2):358-70.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDahl KD, Dunford KM, Wilson SA, Turnbull TL, Tashman S. Wearable sensor validation of sports-related movements for the lower extremity and trunk. Med Eng Phys. 2020;84:144-50.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePunchihewa NG, Miyazaki S, Chosa E, Yamako G. Efficacy of Inertial Measurement Units in the Evaluation of Trunk and Hand Kinematics in Baseball Hitting. Sensors (Basel). 2020;20(24).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan der Straaten R, Bruijnes A, Vanwanseele B, Jonkers I, De Baets L, Timmermans A. Reliability and Agreement of 3D Trunk and Lower Extremity Movement Analysis by Means of Inertial Sensor Technology for Unipodal and Bipodal Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2019;19(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStraaten RV, Timmermans A, Bruijnes A, Vanwanseele B, Jonkers I, Baets L. Reliability of 3D Lower Extremity Movement Analysis by Means of Inertial Sensor Technology during Transitional Tasks. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18(8).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVitali RV, Perkins NC. Determining anatomical frames via inertial motion capture: A survey of methods. J Biomech. 2020;106:109832.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWu G, van der Helm FC, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, et al. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion--Part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J Biomech. 2005;38(5):981-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWells D, Alderson J, Camomilla V, Donnelly C, Elliott B, Cereatti A. Elbow joint kinematics during cricket bowling using magneto-inertial sensors: A feasibility study. J Sports Sci. 2019;37(5):515-24.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZeng Z, Liu Y, Hu X, Tang M, Wang L. Validity and Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units on Lower Extremity Kinematics During Running: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med Open. 2022;8(1):86.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen H, Schall MC, Fethke NB. Measuring upper arm elevation using an inertial measurement unit: An exploration of sensor fusion algorithms and gyroscope models. Applied Ergonomics. 2020;89:103187.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBergamini E, Ligorio G, Summa A, Vannozzi G, Cappozzo A, Sabatini AM. Estimating Orientation Using Magnetic and Inertial Sensors and Different Sensor Fusion Approaches: Accuracy Assessment in Manual and Locomotion Tasks. Sensors. 2014;14(10):18625-49.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePicerno P, Cereatti A, Cappozzo A. A spot check for assessing static orientation consistency of inertial and magnetic sensing units. Gait \u0026amp; Posture. 2011;33(3):373-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhou L, Fischer E, Tunca C, Brahms CM, Ersoy C, Granacher U, et al. How We Found Our IMU: Guidelines to IMU Selection and a Comparison of Seven IMUs for Pervasive Healthcare Applications. Sensors. 2020;20(15):4090.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeardini A, Chiari L, Croce UD, Cappozzo A. Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry: Part 3. Soft tissue artifact assessment and compensation. Gait \u0026amp; Posture. 2005;21(2):212-25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"sports-medicine-open","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"smoa","sideBox":"Learn more about [Sports Medicine-Open](http://sportsmedicine-open.springeropen.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/smoa/default.aspx","title":"Sports Medicine-Open","twitterHandle":"@SpringerOpen","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003ch2\u003eBackground\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003espine pain is a leading contributor to global pain and disability, and knowledge of spinal kinematics is essential for understanding and managing this pain and pathology. Expensive and laboratory-confined optoelectronic motion capture systems are considered the gold standard for joint angle measurement, but recently, small and inexpensive inertial measurement units (IMUs) have emerged as a promising alternative, and the rapid growth of literature in this area required a systematic review.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eMethods\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e this systematic review aimed to compile and assess the current literature on concurrent validity (compared to gold standard optoelectronic systems) and test-retest reliability of IMUs for inter-segmental spine kinematics covering the trunk, lumbar, thoracic, and cervical regions into a unified framework in context of recently developed ISB guidelines. Three different databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched. Methodological quality was determined using a structured quality appraisal tool, while direction and strength of evidence were determined based on four criteria (imprecision, risk of bias, indirectness, and inconsistency).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eResults\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e37 studies met the eligibility criteria. Reported validity and reliability metrics indicate that IMUs have the potential to derive reliable and clinically valid spinal kinematics across all anatomical planes and regions. However, their performance is highly sensitive to variations in task, methodology, and context.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eConclusions\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIMUs offer a promising and accessible alternative to optoelectronic systems, but their effective use requires careful consideration, specific validation, and adherence to standardized protocols.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Spinal Kinematics: A Systematic Review","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-08-22 11:43:03","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7056827/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2026-04-23T08:51:10+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2025-08-15T13:26:26+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2025-07-14T01:47:06+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Sports Medicine-Open","date":"2025-07-13T05:55:05+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"sports-medicine-open","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"smoa","sideBox":"Learn more about [Sports Medicine-Open](http://sportsmedicine-open.springeropen.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/smoa/default.aspx","title":"Sports Medicine-Open","twitterHandle":"@SpringerOpen","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC/SO AJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"ec38b468-cd20-41d8-8d05-391e151f72b0","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 22nd, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-08-22T11:43:03+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-08-22 11:43:03","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7056827","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7056827","identity":"rs-7056827","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}