Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31823114›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2020

Prediction of lower limb joint angles and moments during gait using artificial neural networks.

Marion Mundt, Wolf Thomsen, Tom Witter, Arnd Koeppe, Sina David, Franz Bamer, Wolfgang Potthast, Bernd Markert

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  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

8 authors.

Marion MundtInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany. mundt@iam.rwth-aachen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6624-2895
Wolf ThomsenInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Tom WitterInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Arnd KoeppeInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Sina DavidInstitute of Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Franz BamerInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Wolfgang PotthastInstitute of Biomechanics and Orthopaedics, German Sport University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Bernd MarkertInstitute of General Mechanics, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, gait analysis outside the laboratory attracts more and more attention in clinical applications as well as in life sciences. Wearable sensors such as inertial sensors show high potential in these applications. Unfortunately, they can only measure kinematic motions patterns indirectly and the outcome is currently jeopardized by measurement discrepancies compared with the gold standard of optical motion tracking. The aim of this study was to overcome the limitation of measurement discrepancies and the missing information on kinetic motion parameters using a machine learning application based on artificial neural networks. For this purpose, inertial sensor data-linear acceleration and angular rate-was simulated from a database of optical motion tracking data and used as input for a feedforward and long short-term memory neural network to predict the joint angles and moments of the lower limbs during gait. Both networks achieved mean correlation coefficients higher than 0.80 in the minor motion planes, and correlation coefficients higher than 0.98 in the sagittal plane. These results encourage further applications of artificial intelligence to support gait analysis. Graphical Abstract The graphical abstract displays the processing of the data: IMU data is used as input to a feedforward and a long short-term memory neural network to predict the joint kinematics and kinetics of the lower limbs during gait.

Indexed as

Neural Networks, ComputerBiomechanical PhenomenaDatabases as TopicGaitHumansJointsKineticsLower ExtremityModels, BiologicalData augmentationData simulationIMUInertial sensorsMachine learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.