Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32911651›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Evaluation of the Pose Tracking Performance of the Azure Kinect and Kinect v2 for Gait Analysis in Comparison with a Gold Standard: A Pilot Study.

Justin Amadeus Albert, Victor Owolabi, Arnd Gebel, Clemens Markus Brahms, Urs Granacher, Bert Arnrich

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 105 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

45 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Justin Amadeus AlbertConnected Healthcare, Digital Health Center, Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6121-792X
Victor OwolabiConnected Healthcare, Digital Health Center, Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany.
Arnd GebelDivision of Training and Movement Sciences, University of Potsdam, 14469 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6634-6424
Clemens Markus BrahmsDivision of Training and Movement Sciences, University of Potsdam, 14469 Potsdam, Germany.
Urs GranacherDivision of Training and Movement Sciences, University of Potsdam, 14469 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7095-813X
Bert ArnrichConnected Healthcare, Digital Health Center, Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, 14482 Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gait analysis is an important tool for the early detection of neurological diseases and for the assessment of risk of falling in elderly people. The availability of low-cost camera hardware on the market today and recent advances in Machine Learning enable a wide range of clinical and health-related applications, such as patient monitoring or exercise recognition at home. In this study, we evaluated the motion tracking performance of the latest generation of the Microsoft Kinect camera, Azure Kinect, compared to its predecessor Kinect v2 in terms of treadmill walking using a gold standard Vicon multi-camera motion capturing system and the 39 marker Plug-in Gait model. Five young and healthy subjects walked on a treadmill at three different velocities while data were recorded simultaneously with all three camera systems. An easy-to-administer camera calibration method developed here was used to spatially align the 3D skeleton data from both Kinect cameras and the Vicon system. With this calibration, the spatial agreement of joint positions between the two Kinect cameras and the reference system was evaluated. In addition, we compared the accuracy of certain spatio-temporal gait parameters, i.e., step length, step time, step width, and stride time calculated from the Kinect data, with the gold standard system. Our results showed that the improved hardware and the motion tracking algorithm of the Azure Kinect camera led to a significantly higher accuracy of the spatial gait parameters than the predecessor Kinect v2, while no significant differences were found between the temporal parameters. Furthermore, we explain in detail how this experimental setup could be used to continuously monitor the progress during gait rehabilitation in older people.

Indexed as

GaitGait AnalysisAgedAged, 80 and overBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansPilot ProjectsReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSoftwaredigital healthevaluationhuman motionmotion captureRGB-D cameras

Identifiers

PMID32911651
PMCPMC7571213

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.