Next Article in Journal
Bioimpedance Analysis of Cucumber Plants Exposed to Different Nitrogen Doses Under Greenhouse Conditions
Next Article in Special Issue
Combined Proxies for Heart Rate Variability as a Global Tool to Assess and Monitor Autonomic Dysregulation in Fibromyalgia and Disease-Related Impairments
Previous Article in Journal
Principle and Applications of Thermoelectric Generators: A Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Wearable and Thermal Drift-Compensated Monitoring System Based on Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors for a 3D-Printed Foot Prosthesis
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Assessing the Diagnostic Validity of Torsobarography in Scoliosis

Sensors 2025, 25(8), 2485; https://doi.org/10.3390/s25082485
by Nico Stecher 1,*,†, Lea Richter 1,†, Arkadiusz Łukasz Żurawski 2, Andreas Heinke 1, Maximilian Robert Harder 1, Thurid Jochim 1, Paula Schumann 1, Wojciech Piotr Kiebzak 2 and Hagen Malberg 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Sensors 2025, 25(8), 2485; https://doi.org/10.3390/s25082485
Submission received: 7 March 2025 / Revised: 26 March 2025 / Accepted: 14 April 2025 / Published: 15 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Intelligent Medical Sensors and Applications)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The amount of data for textual research is relatively small, and the instrument detects in a supine position, which results in significant differences from the results of standing spine radiographs

2. This study lacks data validation through dynamic follow-up

3. The lack of patients within 10 degrees in the data sample can achieve the purpose of screening scoliosis, and the practicality of the study needs to be considered

4. The evaluation of severe scoliosis has been validated with verification

5.However, the research content of this article is relatively novel

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors
  1. In the manuscript, the measurement error of Cobb Angle was mentioned about 5°, while the classification threshold for the group without/with mild scoliosis was 10°, which could lead to a grouping error. How about the influences of measurement error of Cobb Angle on the results analysis?
  2. Compared with other surface topographic systems for scoliosis assessment, what’s about the performances or advantages of torsobarography?
  3. How about the applicability of torsobarography for different types of scoliosis? For example, idiopathic, congenital scoliosis?
  4. What’re about the influences of pressure distribution on the results? How to optimize the pressure sensor array distribution to improve the performance of torsobarography analysis?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop