Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 293

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Postural Assessment Software (PAS/SAPO): Validation and Reliabiliy

Open access
Ferreira, Elizabeth Alves G., Duarte, Marcos, Maldonado, Edison Puig, Burke, Thomaz Nogueira, Marques, Amelia Pasqual·2010·Clinics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to estimate the accuracy of the postural assessment software (PAS/SAPO) for measurement of corporal angles and distances as well as the inter- and intra-rater reliabilities. INTRODUCTION: Postural assessment software was developed as a subsidiary tool for postural assessment. It is easy to use and available in the public domain. Nonetheless, validation studies are lacking. METHODS: The study sample consisted of 88 pictures from 22 subjects, and each subject was assessed twice (1 week interval) by 5 blinded raters. Inter- and intra-rater reliabilities were estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient. To estimate the accuracy of the software, an inanimate object was marked with hallmarks using pre-established parameters. Pictures of the object were rated, and values were checked against the known parameters. RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability was excellent for 41% of the variables and very good for 35%. Ten percent of the variables had acceptable reliability, and 14% were defined as non-acceptable. For intra-rater reliability, 44.8% of the measurements were considered to be excellent, 23.5% were very good, 12.4% were acceptable and 19.3% were considered non-acceptable. Angular measurements had a mean error analisys of 0.11 degrees , and the mean error analisys for distance was 1.8 mm. DISCUSSION: Unacceptable intraclass correlation coefficient values typically used the vertical line as a reference, and this may have increased the inaccuracy of the estimates. Increased accuracies were obtained by younger raters with more sophisticated computer skills, suggesting that past experience influenced results. CONCLUSION: The postural assessment software was accurate for measuring corporal angles and distances and should be considered as a reliable tool for postural assessment.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1590/s1807-59322010000700005

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Cited by

See all 293

Metadata

Authors
Ferreira, E. A. G., Duarte, M., Maldonado, E. P., Burke, T. N., & Marques, A. P.
Venue
Clinics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010
Volume
65
Issue
7
Pages
675-681
ISSN
1807-5932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2153396636
Cited by
293
References
23
FWCI
24.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Postural Assessment Software (PAS/SAPO): Validation and Reliabiliy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1590/s1807-59322010000700005
The paper
Ferreira, E. A. G., Duarte, M., Maldonado, E. P., Burke, T. N., & Marques, A. P. (2010). Postural Assessment Software (PAS/SAPO): Validation and Reliabiliy. Clinics. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1807-59322010000700005

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.