ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2017
Wearable sensors to predict improvement following an exercise intervention in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06234124 (Characterization and Clinical Trial of a Variable Friction Shoe, a New Paradigm of Reduced-constraint Locomotor Therapy for People Exhibiting Foot Drop Due to Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 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.
Characterization and Clinical Trial of a Variable Friction Shoe, a New Paradigm of Reduced-constraint Locomotor Therapy for People Exhibiting Foot Drop Due to Stroke
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Contribution of Machine Learning in the Validation of Commercial Wearable Sensors for Gait Monitoring in Patients: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Pooled it
- Wearable Sensor Data to Track Subject-Specific Movement Patterns Related to Clinical Outcomes Using a Machine Learning Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Trial
- Deep learning of wrist accelerometry from UK Biobank data identifies early movement signatures of knee osteoarthritis up to 5 years before diagnosis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- Portable electronic devices for mechanotherapy and operative treatment of osteoarthritis.Mechanobiology in medicine · 2026Review
- Emerging Diagnostic Approaches for Musculoskeletal Disorders: Advances in Imaging, Biomarkers, and Clinical Assessment.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- A Biomechanical Dataset of 1,798 Healthy and Injured Subjects During Treadmill Walking and Running.Scientific data · 2024Article
- A machine learning approach for the design optimization of a multiple magnetic and inertial sensors wearable system for the spine mobility assessment.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Gaussian Aquila optimizer based dual convolutional neural networks for identification and grading of osteoarthritis using knee joint images.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Integrative approach to pedobarography and pelvis-trunk motion for knee osteoarthritis detection and exploration of non-radiographic rehabilitation monitoring.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Extended Application of Inertial Measurement Units in Biomechanics: From Activity Recognition to Force Estimation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Motion Sensors for Knee Angle Recognition in Muscle Rehabilitation Solutions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- IMU-Based Monitoring for Assistive Diagnosis and Management of IoHT: A Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Inertial Measurement Units and Application for Remote Health Care in Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: Narrative Review.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2022Review
- Implantable biosensors for musculoskeletal health.Connective tissue research · 2022Review
- Predicting knee adduction moment response to gait retraining with minimal clinical data.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Inertial Sensor-to-Segment Calibration for Accurate 3D Joint Angle Calculation for Use in OpenSim.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- A Wearable System Based on Multiple Magnetic and Inertial Measurement Units for Spine Mobility Assessment: A Reliability Study for the Evaluation of Ankylosing Spondylitis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Review
- Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis in Adults with Osteoarthritis-A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMuscle strengthening exercises consistently demonstrate improvements in the pain and function of adults with knee osteoarthritis, but individual response rates can vary greatly. Identifying individuals who are more likely to respond is important in developing more efficient rehabilitation programs for knee osteoarthritis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine if pre-intervention multi-sensor accelerometer data (e.g., back, thigh, shank, foot accelerometers) and patient reported outcome measures (e.g., pain, symptoms, function, quality of life) can retrospectively predict post-intervention response to a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention in a knee OA cohort.
methodsThirty-nine adults with knee osteoarthritis completed a 6-week hip strengthening exercise intervention and were sub-grouped as Non-Responders, Low-Responders, or High-Responders following the intervention based on their change in patient reported outcome measures. Pre-intervention multi-sensor accelerometer data recorded at the back, thigh, shank, and foot and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscale data were used as potential predictors of response in a discriminant analysis of principal components.
resultsThe thigh was the single best placement for classifying responder sub-groups (74.4%). Overall, the best combination of sensors was the back, thigh, and shank (81.7%), but a simplified two sensor solution using the back and thigh was not significantly different (80.0%; p = 0.27).
conclusionsWhile three sensors were best able to identify responders, a simplified two sensor array at the back and thigh may be the most ideal configuration to provide clinicians with an efficient and relatively unobtrusive way to use to optimize treatment.
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.