Where this summary comes from
Karbalaeimahdi M, Minoonejad H, Mousavi SH, Rajabi R. Photogrammetry-based smartphone applications for spinal posture assessment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientific Reports, 2025. PMID 41398198.
The paper itself — doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-32708-1
Study design: Systematic review and meta-analysis · 29 studies · 1,910 participants · 8 applications
What the paper asked
How reliable is measuring posture from a photograph, and how well does it agree with the reference method?
What was found
- The craniovertebral angle came out strongest: inter-rater ICC = 0.889, test–retest ICC = 0.904, and validity against the reference method ICC = 0.938.
- Head tilt reads almost identically between two raters: ICC = 0.962.
- Acromion (shoulder) alignment is good between raters (ICC = 0.904) but only moderate against the reference: ICC = 0.603.
- Hip tilt is the weakest: test–retest ICC = 0.642.
What does not follow from it
- Only English-language papers were included, and the methods varied between studies.
- No study reported a minimal clinically important difference. We know the measurement repeats; we do not know how many degrees of change actually matters to a person.
What it means for someone here
This review examined eight named applications and does not validate the Khoshbaten tool. A similar photographic method does not establish that another tool achieves the same results. Reliability describes consistency across repeated measurements; validity concerns agreement with a reference method. ICC is not an individual's diagnostic accuracy percentage. Review landmark visibility, capture conditions and measurement limitations, and interpret the numbers alongside symptoms and a practitioner's assessment.
Related findings
This page summarises one study. It is not treatment advice, and no programme is written for a person from a single paper.