Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33028042›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Motion Capture Technology in Industrial Applications: A Systematic Review.

Matteo Menolotto, Dimitrios-Sokratis Komaris, Salvatore Tedesco, Brendan O'Flynn, Michael Walsh

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 49 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
17.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 287 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Sensing Technology Applications in the Mining Industry-A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Smile analysis in dentistry and orthodontics - a review.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025
    Review
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matteo MenolottoTyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork T23, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-7688-3821
Dimitrios-Sokratis KomarisTyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork T23, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-4623-9060
Salvatore TedescoTyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork T23, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-7752-2240
Brendan O'FlynnTyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork T23, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-5522-2597
Michael WalshTyndall National Institute, University College Cork, Cork T23, Ireland.
University College Cork · IE

Funding

Science Foundation Ireland 12/RC/2289-P2Science Foundation Ireland 13/RC/2077Science Foundation Ireland 16/RC/3918
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid technological advancements of Industry 4.0 have opened up new vectors for novel industrial processes that require advanced sensing solutions for their realization. Motion capture (MoCap) sensors, such as visual cameras and inertial measurement units (IMUs), are frequently adopted in industrial settings to support solutions in robotics, additive manufacturing, teleworking and human safety. This review synthesizes and evaluates studies investigating the use of MoCap technologies in industry-related research. A search was performed in the Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Only studies in English, from 2015 onwards, on primary and secondary industrial applications were considered. The quality of the articles was appraised with the AXIS tool. Studies were categorized based on type of used sensors, beneficiary industry sector, and type of application. Study characteristics, key methods and findings were also summarized. In total, 1682 records were identified, and 59 were included in this review. Twenty-one and 38 studies were assessed as being prone to medium and low risks of bias, respectively. Camera-based sensors and IMUs were used in 40% and 70% of the studies, respectively. Construction (30.5%), robotics (15.3%) and automotive (10.2%) were the most researched industry sectors, whilst health and safety (64.4%) and the improvement of industrial processes or products (17%) were the most targeted applications. Inertial sensors were the first choice for industrial MoCap applications. Camera-based MoCap systems performed better in robotic applications, but camera obstructions caused by workers and machinery was the most challenging issue. Advancements in machine learning algorithms have been shown to increase the capabilities of MoCap systems in applications such as activity and fatigue detection as well as tool condition monitoring and object recognition.

Indexed as

health and safetyIMUindustry 4.0motion trackingrobot controlwearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID33028042
PMCPMC7583783
OpenAlexW3091816019

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.