Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30513595›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2018

Comparison of Different Algorithms for Calculating Velocity and Stride Length in Running Using Inertial Measurement Units.

Markus Zrenner, Stefan Gradl, Ulf Jensen, Martin Ullrich, Bjoern M Eskofier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Markus ZrennerMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91052 Erlangen, Germany. markus.zrenner@fau.de.
Stefan GradlMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91052 Erlangen, Germany. stefan.gradl@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0003-1443-7652
Ulf JensenFinance & IT-IT Innovation, Adidas AG, 91074 Herzogenaurach, Germany. ulf.jensen@adidas.com.
Martin UllrichMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91052 Erlangen, Germany. martin.ullrich@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7348-6097
Bjoern M EskofierMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), 91052 Erlangen, Germany. bjoern.eskofier@fau.de.ORCID 0000-0002-0417-0336
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg · DEAdidas (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Running has a positive impact on human health and is an accessible sport for most people. There is high demand for tracking running performance and progress for amateurs and professionals alike. The parameters velocity and distance are thereby of main interest. In this work, we evaluate the accuracy of four algorithms, which calculate the stride velocity and stride length during running using data of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) placed in the midsole of a running shoe. The four algorithms are based on stride time, foot acceleration, foot trajectory estimation, and deep learning, respectively. They are compared using two studies: a laboratory-based study comprising 2377 strides from 27 subjects with 3D motion tracking as a reference and a field study comprising 12 subjects performing a 3.2-km run in a real-world setup. The results show that the foot trajectory estimation algorithm performs best, achieving a mean error of 0.032 ± 0.274 m/s for the velocity estimation and 0.022 ± 0.157 m for the stride length. An interesting alternative for systems with a low energy budget is the acceleration-based approach. Our results support the implementation decision for running velocity and distance tracking using IMUs embedded in the sole of a running shoe.

Indexed as

RheologyShoesAccelerationAlgorithmsAnthropometryDecision MakingFemaleFootHumansMaleMotionRunninggaitinertial measurement unitrunningsmart shoestride lengthvelocitywearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID30513595
PMCPMC6308955
OpenAlexW2902156989

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.