ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2017
Validation of a High Sampling Rate Inertial Measurement Unit for Acceleration During Running.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of a Markerless Multi-Camera Pipeline for Bouldering Fall Kinematics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Validity of an Inertial Measurement Unit System to Measure Lower Limb Kinematics at Point of Contact during Incremental High-Speed Running.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Parameterization of Biomechanical Variables through Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) in Occasional Healthy Runners.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Timing in Lower Limb Complex Movement Tests for DanceSport Athletes: Relation between FitLight Trainer and IMU Measurements.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Is This the Real Life, or Is This Just Laboratory? A Scoping Review of IMU-Based Running Gait Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Change-Point Detection of Peak Tibial Acceleration in Overground Running Retraining.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Exploring wearable sensors as an alternative to marker-based motion capture in the pitching delivery.PeerJ · 2019Article
- Wearable Movement Sensors for Rehabilitation: A Focused Review of Technological and Clinical Advances.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2018Review
- The Effect of the Accelerometer Operating Range on Biomechanical Parameters: Stride Length, Velocity, and Peak Tibial Acceleration during Running.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The musculo-skeletal response of athletes to various activities during training exercises has become a critical issue in order to optimize their performance and minimize injuries. However, dynamic and kinematic measures of an athlete's activity are generally limited by constraints in data collection and technology. Thus, the choice of reliable and accurate sensors is crucial for gathering data in indoor and outdoor conditions. The aim of this study is to validate the use of the accelerometer of a high sampling rate ( 1344 Hz ) Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) in the frame of running activities. To this end, two validation protocols are imposed: a classical one on a shaker, followed by another one during running, the IMU being attached to a test subject. For each protocol, the response of the IMU Accelerometer (IMUA) is compared to a calibrated industrial accelerometer, considered as the gold standard for dynamic and kinematic data collection. The repeatability, impact of signal frequency and amplitude (on shaker) as well as the influence of speed (while running) are investigated. Results reveal that the IMUA exhibits good repeatability. Coefficient of Variation CV is 1 % 8.58 ± 0.06 m / s 2 on the shaker and 3 % 26.65 ± 0.69 m / s 2 while running. However, the shaker test shows that the IMUA is affected by the signal frequency (error exceeds 10 % beyond 80 Hz ), an observation confirmed by the running test. Nevertheless, the IMUA provides a reliable measure in the range 0-100 Hz, i.e., the most relevant part in the energy spectrum over the range 0-150 Hz during running. In our view, these findings emphasize the validity of IMUs for the measurement of acceleration during running.
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.