ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2020
Systematic Comparison of the Influence of Different Data Preprocessing Methods on the Performance of Gait Classifications Using Machine Learning.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Manual annotation based sentiment analysis of user feedback in health and wellness app reviews.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Structural Vibration-based Dataset for Human Gait Recognition.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Entropy, Irreversibility, and Time-Series Deep Learning of Kinematic and Kinetic Data for Gait Classification in Children with Cerebral Palsy, Idiopathic Toe Walking, and Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Modelling individual variation in human walking gait across populations and walking conditions via gait recognition.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
- Unveiling individuality in the early phase of motor learning: a machine learning approach for analysing weightlifting technique in novices.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Development of a predictive model for 1-year postoperative recovery in patients with lumbar disk herniation based on deep learning and machine learning.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Deep Metric Learning for Scalable Gait-Based Person Re-Identification Using Force Platform Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Identifying underlying individuality across running, walking, and handwriting patterns with conditional cycle-consistent generative adversarial networks.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and prognosis of COVID-19 employing analysis of patients' plasma and serum via LC-MS and machine learning.Computers in biology and medicine · 2022Article
- Machine Learning Approach to Support the Detection of Parkinson's Disease in IMU-Based Gait Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Predicting the Internal Knee Abduction Impulse During Walking Using Deep Learning.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Gutenberg Gait Database, a ground reaction force database of level overground walking in healthy individuals.Scientific data · 2021Article
- Effect of Lubricant Type on the Friction Behaviours and Surface Topography in Metal Forming of Ti-6Al-4V Titanium Alloy Sheets.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Machine learning-based prediction of survival prognosis in cervical cancer.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Using Accelerometer Data to Tune the Parameters of an Extended Kalman Filter for Optical Motion Capture: Preliminary Application to Gait Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A Survey of Human Gait-Based Artificial Intelligence Applications.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2021Review
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in the Establishment of an Association Model between Metabolic Syndrome, TCM Constitution, and the Guidance of Medicated Diet Care.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- Chronic Pain Diagnosis Using Machine Learning, Questionnaires, and QST: A Sensitivity Experiment.Diagnostics (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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human movements are characterized by highly non-linear and multi-dimensional interactions within the motor system. Therefore, the future of human movement analysis requires procedures that enhance the classification of movement patterns into relevant groups and support practitioners in their decisions. In this regard, the use of data-driven techniques seems to be particularly suitable to generate classification models. Recently, an increasing emphasis on machine-learning applications has led to a significant contribution, e.g., in increasing the classification performance. In order to ensure the generalizability of the machine-learning models, different data preprocessing steps are usually carried out to process the measured raw data before the classifications. In the past, various methods have been used for each of these preprocessing steps. However, there are hardly any standard procedures or rather systematic comparisons of these different methods and their impact on the classification performance. Therefore, the aim of this analysis is to compare different combinations of commonly applied data preprocessing steps and test their effects on the classification performance of gait patterns. A publicly available dataset on intra-individual changes of gait patterns was used for this analysis. Forty-two healthy participants performed 6 sessions of 15 gait trials for 1 day. For each trial, two force plates recorded the three-dimensional ground reaction forces (GRFs). The data was preprocessed with the following steps: GRF filtering, time derivative, time normalization, data reduction, weight normalization and data scaling. Subsequently, combinations of all methods from each preprocessing step were analyzed by comparing their prediction performance in a six-session classification using Support Vector Machines, Random Forest Classifiers, Multi-Layer Perceptrons, and Convolutional Neural Networks. The results indicate that filtering GRF data and a supervised data reduction (e.g., using Principal Components Analysis) lead to increased prediction performance of the machine-learning classifiers. Interestingly, the weight normalization and the number of data points (above a certain minimum) in the time normalization does not have a substantial effect. In conclusion, the present results provide first domain-specific recommendations for commonly applied data preprocessing methods and might help to build more comparable and more robust classification models based on machine learning that are suitable for a practical application.
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.