Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28841142›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2017

Validation of a High Sampling Rate Inertial Measurement Unit for Acceleration During Running.

Thomas Provot, Xavier Chiementin, Emeric Oudin, Fabrice Bolaers, Sébastien Murer

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Wearable Movement Sensors for Rehabilitation: A Focused Review of Technological and Clinical Advances.PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2018
    Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas ProvotEPF, 3 bis rue Lakanal, 92330 Sceaux, France. thomas.provot@epf.fr.
Xavier ChiementinGRESPI, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, 51687 Reims CEDEX 2, France. xavier.chiementin@univ-reims.fr.
Emeric OudinneXXtep Technologies, 11 rue du Four, 51000 Châlons-en-Champagne, France. emeric.oudin@nexxtep-technologies.com.
Fabrice BolaersGRESPI, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, 51687 Reims CEDEX 2, France. fabrice.bolaers@univ-reims.fr.
Sébastien MurerGRESPI, Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne, 51687 Reims CEDEX 2, France. sebastien.murer@univ-reims.fr.
Université de Reims Champagne-Ardenne · FREPF - École d'ingénieurs · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

RunningAccelerationAthletesBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansaccelerometerinertial measurement unitreliabilityrunning

Identifiers

PMID28841142
PMCPMC5621469
OpenAlexW2745606338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.