ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2019
Estimation of Ankle Joint Power during Walking Using Two Inertial Sensors.
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 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Inertial Motion Capture-Based Wearable Systems for Estimation of Joint Kinetics: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Diagnostic Accuracy and Clinical Applications of Wearable Movement Sensors for Knee Joint Rehabilitation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Pooled it
- Predicting normative walking biomechanics across the lifespan using seven simple features.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Use of Technologies for the Acquisition and Processing Strategies for Motion Data Analysis.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development of an assessment of bilateral locomotor efficacy for individuals post-stroke.Gait & posture · 2023Article
- Extended Application of Inertial Measurement Units in Biomechanics: From Activity Recognition to Force Estimation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Machine-Learning-Based Methodology for Estimation of Shoulder Load in Wheelchair-Related Activities Using Wearables.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Low limb prostheses and complex human prosthetic interaction: A systematic literature review.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2023Review
- Building Effective Machine Learning Models for Ankle Joint Power Estimation During Walking Using FMG Sensors.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2022Article
- Assessment Methods of Post-stroke Gait: A Scoping Review of Technology-Driven Approaches to Gait Characterization and Analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Estimating Vertical Ground Reaction Force during Walking Using a Single Inertial Sensor.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Estimating Lower Extremity Running Gait Kinematics with a Single Accelerometer: A Deep Learning Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Lower Body Kinematics Monitoring in Running Using Fabric-Based Wearable Sensors and Deep Convolutional Neural Networks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: Ankle joint power, as an indicator of the ability to control lower limbs, is of great relevance for clinical diagnosis of gait impairment and control of lower limb prosthesis. However, the majority of available techniques for estimating joint power are based on inverse dynamics methods, which require performing a biomechanical analysis of the foot and using a highly instrumented environment to tune the parameters of the resulting biomechanical model. Such techniques are not generally applicable to real-world scenarios in which gait monitoring outside of the clinical setting is desired. This paper proposes a viable alternative to such techniques by using machine learning algorithms to estimate ankle joint power from data collected by two miniature inertial measurement units (IMUs) on the foot and shank, (2) Methods: Nine participants walked on a force-plate-instrumented treadmill wearing two IMUs. The data from the IMUs were processed to train and test a random forest model to estimate ankle joint power. The performance of the model was then evaluated by comparing the estimated power values to the reference values provided by the motion tracking system and the force-plate-instrumented treadmill. (3) Results: The proposed method achieved a high accuracy with the correlation coefficient, root mean square error, and normalized root mean square error of 0.98, 0.06 w/kg, and 1.05% in the intra-subject test, and 0.92, 0.13 w/kg, and 2.37% in inter-subject test, respectively. The difference between the predicted and true peak power values was 0.01 w/kg and 0.14 w/kg with a delay of 0.4% and 0.4% of gait cycle duration for the intra- and inter-subject testing, respectively. (4) Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate the feasibility of using only two IMUs to estimate ankle joint power. The proposed technique provides a basis for developing a portable and compact gait monitoring system that can potentially offer monitoring and reporting on ankle joint power in real-time during activities of daily living.
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.