Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33112850›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

Differences between joint-space and musculoskeletal estimations of metabolic rate time profiles.

Arash Mohammadzadeh Gonabadi, Prokopios Antonellis, Philippe Malcolm

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Perturbation-based estimation of within-stride cycle metabolic cost.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A System for Simple Robotic Walking Assistance With Linear Impulses at the Center of Mass.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2020
    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

3 authors.

Arash Mohammadzadeh GonabadiDepartment of Biomechanics and Center for Research in Human Movement Variability, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America.
Prokopios AntonellisDepartment of Biomechanics and Center for Research in Human Movement Variability, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America.
Philippe MalcolmDepartment of Biomechanics and Center for Research in Human Movement Variability, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, Nebraska, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4110-4167

Funding

Visual control of locomotion in people with Parkinsons diseaseP20GM109090 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA · PI KNARR, BRIAN ANDREW · 2014 to 2023
$20.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109090
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motion capture laboratories can measure multiple variables at high frame rates, but we can only measure the average metabolic rate of a stride using respiratory measurements. Biomechanical simulations with equations for calculating metabolic rate can estimate the time profile of metabolic rate within the stride cycle. A variety of methods and metabolic equations have been proposed, including metabolic time profile estimations based on joint parameters. It is unclear whether differences in estimations are due to differences in experimental data or due to methodological differences. This study aimed to compare two methods for estimating the time profile of metabolic rate, within a single dataset. Knowledge about the consistency of different methods could be useful for applications such as detecting which part of the gait cycle causes increased metabolic cost in patients. Here we compare estimations of metabolic rate time profiles using a musculoskeletal and a joint-space method. The musculoskeletal method was driven by kinematics and electromyography data and used muscle metabolic rate equations, whereas the joint-space method used metabolic rate equations based on joint parameters. Both estimations of changes in stride average metabolic rate correlated significantly with large changes in indirect calorimetry from walking on different grades showing that both methods accurately track changes. However, estimations of changes in stride average metabolic rate did not correlate significantly with more subtle changes in indirect calorimetry due to walking with different shoe inclinations, and both the musculoskeletal and joint-space time profile estimations did not correlate significantly with each other except in the most downward shoe inclination. Estimations of the relative cost of stance and swing matched well with previous simulations with similar methods and estimations from experimental perturbations. Rich experimental datasets could further advance time profile estimations. This knowledge could be useful to develop therapies and assistive devices that target the least metabolically economic part of the gait cycle.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalMuscle, SkeletalAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaComputational BiologyElectromyographyEnergy MetabolismGaitHumansLower ExtremityWalkingYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33112850
PMCPMC7592801

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.