Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31151183›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019

Evaluation of Gait Phase Detection Delay Compensation Strategies to Control a Gyroscope-Controlled Functional Electrical Stimulation System During Walking.

Nicole Zahradka, Ahad Behboodi, Henry Wright, Barry Bodt, Samuel Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. eHealth: A Survey of Architectures, Developments in mHealth, Security Concerns and Solutions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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.

Nicole ZahradkaBiomechanics and Movement Science Program, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. nzahrad1@jhu.edu.
Ahad BehboodiBiomechanics and Movement Science Program, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. ahadbeh@udel.edu.
Henry WrightDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. henryw@udel.edu.
Barry BodtBiostatistics Core Facility, College of Health Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. babodt@udel.edu.
Samuel LeeBiomechanics and Movement Science Program, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19713, USA. slee@udel.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3749-2665

Funding

Pilot Project ProgramP30GM103333 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE · PI BUCHANAN, THOMAS S · 2012 to 2016
$5.7M
National Institutes of Health P30 GM103333NIGMS NIH HHS P30 GM103333Shriners Hospitals for Children 71011Shriners Hospitals for Children 71011-PHI-18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional electrical stimulation systems are used as neuroprosthetic devices in rehabilitative interventions such as gait training. Stimulator triggers, implemented to control stimulation delivery, range from open- to closed-loop controllers. Finite-state controllers trigger stimulators when specific conditions are met and utilize preset sequences of stimulation. Wearable sensors provide the necessary input to differentiate gait phases during walking and trigger stimulation. However, gait phase detection is associated with inherent system delays. In this study, five stimulator triggers designed to compensate for gait phase detection delays were tested to determine which trigger most accurately delivered stimulation at the desired times of the gait cycle. Motion capture data were collected on seven typically-developing children while walking on an instrumented treadmill. Participants wore one inertial measurement unit on each ankle and gyroscope data were streamed into the gait phase detection algorithm. Five triggers, based on gait phase detection, were used to simulate stimulation to five muscle groups, bilaterally. For each condition, stimulation signals were collected in the motion capture software via analog channels and compared to the desired timing determined by kinematic and kinetic data. Results illustrate that gait phase detection is a viable finite-state control, and appropriate system delay compensations, on average, reduce stimulation delivery delays by 6.7% of the gait cycle.

Indexed as

finite-state controlfunctional electrical stimulation (FES)gait phase detection (GPD)

Identifiers

PMID31151183
PMCPMC6603781

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.