Skip to main content

Table 4 Accuracy errors E in mm for each subject and each algorithm between the true GHJC and the estimated one

From: In vivo estimation of the shoulder joint center of rotation using magneto-inertial sensors: MRI-based accuracy and repeatability assessment

Algorithm

Subject 1

Subject 2

Subject 3

Subject 4

Subject 5

Mean

\({\text{NAP}}^{\left( 1 \right)}\)

16.4 ± 7

37.3 ± 10

11.2 ± 4

21.3 ± 3

17.3 ± 5

20.7 ± 10

\({\text{NAP}}_{{\upomega}}^{\left( 1 \right)}\)

15.9 ± 7

37.5 ± 10

11.2 ± 4

21.1 ± 3

17.3 ± 5

20.6 ± 10

\({\text{NAP}}_{{\upomega {\text{a}}}}^{\left( 2 \right)}\)

18.0 ± 6

38.5 ± 10

12.4 ± 7

19.8 ± 4

18.5 ± 6

21.4 ± 11

\({\text{SSFC}}^{\left( 2 \right)}\)

29.3 ± 5*

37.9 ± 10

29.4 ± 10*

22.2 ± 6*

30.7 ± 9*

29.9 ± 10

\({\text{SAC}}^{\left( 2 \right)}\)

22.6 ± 5

33.8 ± 11

12.6 ± 5

21.6 ± 3

19.1 ± 4

21.9 ± 9

  1. Mean ± STD. A star indicates a statistically significant difference between that specific algorithm (on that subject) and all the other algorithms, with p < 0.005 (Student’s t test with Bonferroni’s correction)