ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Automatic Classification of Squat Posture Using Inertial Sensors: Deep Learning Approach.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- IMU-based identification of rowing conditions through supervised machine learning.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Assessing Low Back Movement with Motion Tape Sensor Data Through Deep Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Anthropometry and diagnostic aware deep learning for exercise assessment.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Article
- Cloud-to-Thing continuum-based sports monitoring system using machine learning and deep learning model.PeerJ. Computer science · 2025Article
- Fine-Grained Motion Recognition in At-Home Fitness Monitoring with Smartwatch: A Comparative Analysis of Explainable Deep Neural Networks.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Automatic Assessment of Functional Movement Screening Exercises with Deep Learning Architectures.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Predicting Knee Joint Kinematics from Wearable Sensor Data in People with Knee Osteoarthritis and Clinical Considerations for Future Machine Learning Models.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Real-Time Tracking of Human Neck Postures and Movements.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Wearable Sensors and Systems in the IoT.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Human Activity Recognition for People with Knee Osteoarthritis-A Proof-of-Concept.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Prediction and comparison of postural discomfort based on MLP and quadratic regression.Journal of occupational health · 2021Article
- An Evaluation of Posture Recognition Based on Intelligent Rapid Entire Body Assessment System for Determining Musculoskeletal Disorders.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Computationally Efficient 3D Orientation Tracking Using Gyroscope Measurements.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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Without expert coaching, inexperienced exercisers performing core exercises, such as squats, are subject to an increased risk of spinal or knee injuries. Although it is theoretically possible to measure the kinematics of body segments and classify exercise forms with wearable sensors and algorithms, the current implementations are not sufficiently accurate. In this study, the squat posture classification performance of deep learning was compared to that of conventional machine learning. Additionally, the location for the optimal placement of sensors was determined. Accelerometer and gyroscope data were collected from 39 healthy participants using five inertial measurement units (IMUs) attached to the left thigh, right thigh, left calf, right calf, and lumbar region. Each participant performed six repetitions of an acceptable squat and five incorrect forms of squats that are typically observed in inexperienced exercisers. The accuracies of squat posture classification obtained using conventional machine learning and deep learning were compared. Each result was obtained using one IMU or a combination of two or five IMUs. When employing five IMUs, the accuracy of squat posture classification using conventional machine learning was 75.4%, whereas the accuracy using deep learning was 91.7%. When employing two IMUs, the highest accuracy (88.7%) was obtained using deep learning for a combination of IMUs on the right thigh and right calf. The single IMU yielded the best results on the right thigh, with an accuracy of 58.7% for conventional machine learning and 80.9% for deep learning. Overall, the results obtained using deep learning were superior to those obtained using conventional machine learning for both single and multiple IMUs. With regard to the convenience of use in self-fitness, the most feasible strategy was to utilize a single IMU on the right thigh.
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.