期刊文献+

两种测量方法在成年女性冠状面形体测量中的Bland-Altman一致性评价

Consistancy of two measurements in coronary-plane posture measurement of adult women by bland-altman analysis
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨女性冠状面形态参数在脊柱全长X片与智能三维体态评估系评估的一致性。方法2021年10月至2022年7月北京大学人民医院招募144例女性于妇科进行形体评估为受试对象。使用正位全脊柱X片作为冠状位肩膀平衡角(clavicle angle,CA)、脊柱侧弯Cobb角(Cobb)及骨盆平衡角(pelvic obliquity,PO)测量的金标准,再使用智能三维体态评估系统对CA、Cobb及PO角进行测量。使用Bland-Altman方法评价两种方法的一致性。结果CA、Cobb及PO角的差值均值分别为-0.2、0.2及0.2,95%的点均在临床可接受的一致性界值内,一致性良好。结论智能三维体态评估系统在冠状面脊柱角度的测量可以在一定程度上替代X线片作为测量方法。 Objective To investigate the consistency of the evaluation of the posture parameters of coronal plane in the full spine X-ray and the intelligent three-dimensional posture evaluation system.Methods 144 participants were evaluated in the Gynecology Clinic of the People's Hospital of Peking University.The anterior full spine X-ray was used as the gold standard for the measurement of clavic angle(CA),scoliosis Cobb angle(Cobb)and pelvic obliquity(PO)in coronal plane.The intelligent three-dimensional posture evaluation system was used to measure CA,Cobb and PO angles again.The Bland-Altman method was used to evaluate the consistency of the two methods.Results For CA,Cobb,and PO angle,the mean value of difference was-0.2,0.2 and 0.2.The parameters were all within 95%of the clinically acceptable consistency threshold,with good consistency.Conclusion The results of CA,Cobb,and PO angle in coronal plane by the intelligent three-dimensional posture evaluation system,were consistent with the result of spine X-ray.
作者 朱红梅 高蕾 谢冰 刘慧鑫 矫玮 孙秀丽 ZHU Hongmel;GAO Lei;XIE Bing;LIU Huixin;JIAO Wei;SUN Xiuli(Department of Sports medicine and rehabilitation,Beijing Sports University,Beijing 100084,China;Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Peking University People's Hospital,Beijing 100044,China;Department of Research,Peking University People's Hospital,Beijing 100044,China)
出处 《中国妇产科临床杂志》 CSCD 2023年第3期285-288,共4页 Chinese Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology
基金 国家自然科学基金(82101697) 北京市自然科学基金(7214263) 中国整形美容协会基金(2020-Z-27)。
关键词 Bland-Altman法 一致性分析 形体 bland-altman consistency posture
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献42

  • 1陈卉.Bland-Altman分析在临床测量方法一致性评价中的应用[J].中国卫生统计,2007,24(3):308-309. 被引量:217
  • 2李镒冲,李晓松.两种测量方法定量测量结果的一致性评价[J].现代预防医学,2007,34(17):3263-3266. 被引量:154
  • 3Dunn G. Method comparison studies [ M ]. In: Lovric M. Inter- national Encyclopedia of Staistical Science. Spinger, 2011 : 815- 816.
  • 4Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies[ J]. Statistician, 1983, 32.. 307- 317.
  • 5Bland JM, Ahman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agree- ment between two methods of clinical measurement [ J ]. Lancet, 1986, 1(8476) : 307-310.
  • 6NCCLS. Method Comparison and Bias Estimation Using Patient Samples; Approved Guideline-Second Edition[ S]. NCCLS docu- ment EP9-A2.
  • 7Center for Devices and Radiological Health ( CDRH), US Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ). Guidance for industry and FDA staff: recommendations for clinical laboratory improvement amendments of 1988 (CLIA) waiver applications for manufactur- ers of in vitro diagnostic devices. 2008. Available online at : http ://www. fda. gov/cdrh/oivd/guidance/1171, pdf.
  • 8Zaki R, Bulgiba A, Ismail R, et al. Statistical methods used to test for agreement of medical instruments measuring continuous variables in method comparison studies: a systematic review[ J]. PLoS One, 2012, 7(5) : e37908.
  • 9Chhapola V, Kanwal SK, Brat R. Reporting standards for Bland- Altman agreement analysis in laboratory research : a cross-section- al survey of current practice[J]. Ann Clin Bioehem, 2015, 52 (Pt 3) : 382-386.
  • 10Bland JM, Altman DG. Comparing methods of measurement-why plotting difference against standard method is misleading [ J ]. Lancet, 1995, 346: 1085-1087.

共引文献68

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部