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)