ArticlePloS one2016
Development of a Kinect Software Tool to Classify Movements during Active Video Gaming.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital motor intervention effects on physical activity performance of individuals with developmental disabilities: a systematic review.Disability and rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- Sensing In Exergames for Efficacy and Motion Quality: Scoping Review of Recent Publications.JMIR serious games · 2024Article
- Physiological Responses to Active Video Games Compared to Treadmill Walking and TV Watching in Obese Children and Adolescents.International journal of exercise science · 2021Article
- A Video-Based Classification System for Assessing Locomotor Skills in Children.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2020Article
- Quantifying Physical Activity in Young Children Using a Three-Dimensional Camera.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Exploring Movement Impairments in Patients With Parkinson's Disease Using the Microsoft Kinect Sensor: A Feasibility Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While it has been established that using full body motion to play active video games results in increased levels of energy expenditure, there is little information on the classification of human movement during active video game play in relationship to fundamental movement skills. The aim of this study was to validate software utilising Kinect sensor motion capture technology to recognise fundamental movement skills (FMS), during active video game play. Two human assessors rated jumping and side-stepping and these assessments were compared to the Kinect Action Recognition Tool (KART), to establish a level of agreement and determine the number of movements completed during five minutes of active video game play, for 43 children (m = 12 years 7 months ± 1 year 6 months). During five minutes of active video game play, inter-rater reliability, when examining the two human raters, was found to be higher for the jump (r = 0.94, p < .01) than the sidestep (r = 0.87, p < .01), although both were excellent. Excellent reliability was also found between human raters and the KART system for the jump (r = 0.84, p, .01) and moderate reliability for sidestep (r = 0.6983, p < .01) during game play, demonstrating that both humans and KART had higher agreement for jumps than sidesteps in the game play condition. The results of the study provide confidence that the Kinect sensor can be used to count the number of jumps and sidestep during five minutes of active video game play with a similar level of accuracy as human raters. However, in contrast to humans, the KART system required a fraction of the time to analyse and tabulate the results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.