ArticleHuman movement science2020
Combining wearable sensor signals, machine learning and biomechanics to estimate tibial bone force and damage during running.
Article in Human movement science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
50 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 82 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive accuracy of machine learning and markerless gait analysis for return-to-sport following lower extremity injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Pooled it
- Acute Effects of Gait Interventions on Tibial Loads During Running: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Pooled it
- Inertial Motion Capture-Based Wearable Systems for Estimation of Joint Kinetics: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Pooled it
- Recent Machine Learning Progress in Lower Limb Running Biomechanics With Wearable Technology: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2022Pooled it
- The Heel-Strike Fallacy and Cadence Beliefs in Distance Running: A Narrative Review.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
- Response to Comment on "Developing a Fundamental Theoretical Definition for Athletic Injury: Metaphysics, Logic, and Mathematics".Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Towards High-Accuracy Athletic Injury Predictions Using a First-Principles Modelling Approach: Theory to (Future) Practice.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Weaving Intelligence: Thermally Drawn Multimaterial Fibers Toward AI-Enabled Smart Textiles.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- A Multimodal Dataset of Full-Body Kinematics and Kinetics from Laboratory- and Wearable-Based Systems.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Developing a Fundamental Theoretical Definition for Athletic Injury: Metaphysics, Logic, and Mathematics.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Sports Medicine: A Decision-Centered Framework for the Future Sports Physician.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A Computational Pipeline for Activity Prediction Using Wearable Sensor Data.Research square · 2026Article
- Two-week cumulative tendon load estimated from insole sensor contact forces is associated with plantar flexor function in Achilles tendinopathy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Real-time wearable biomechanics framework for sports injury prevention and rehabilitation optimization.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Identification of modifiable gait parameters predictive of simulated tibial stress-fracture risk in men and women.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Effect of various carbon plate running shoes on peak tibial accelerations, lateral asymmetry and residual shock in running.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Effects of Acute Altitude, Speed and Surface on Biomechanical Loading in Distance Running.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Psychologically informed patient education combined with exercise intervention is associated with improvements in tibial loading regulation, joint kinematics, and kinesiophobia in runners with medial tibial stress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Smart exoskeleton-assisted rehabilitation after fracture surgery: closed-loop control, personalized load management, and integrated telemonitoring.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Opportunities Offered by Telemedicine in the Care of Patients Affected by Fractures and Critical Issues: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There are tremendous opportunities to advance science, clinical care, sports performance, and societal health if we are able to develop tools for monitoring musculoskeletal loading (e.g., forces on bones or muscles) outside the lab. While wearable sensors enable non-invasive monitoring of human movement in applied situations, current commercial wearables do not estimate tissue-level loading on structures inside the body. Here we explore the feasibility of using wearable sensors to estimate tibial bone force during running. First, we used lab-based data and musculoskeletal modeling to estimate tibial force for ten participants running across a range of speeds and slopes. Next, we converted lab-based data to signals feasibly measured with wearables (inertial measurement units on the foot and shank, and pressure-sensing insoles) and used these data to develop two multi-sensor algorithms for estimating peak tibial force: one physics-based and one machine learning. Additionally, to reflect current running wearables that utilize running impact metrics to infer musculoskeletal loading or injury risk, we estimated tibial force using a commonly measured impact metric, the ground reaction force vertical average loading rate (VALR). Using VALR to estimate peak tibial force resulted in a mean absolute percent error of 9.9%, which was no more accurate than a theoretical step counter that assumed the same peak force for every running stride. Our physics-based algorithm reduced error to 5.2%, and our machine learning algorithm reduced error to 2.6%. Further, to gain insights into how force estimation accuracy relates to overuse injury risk, we computed bone damage expected due to a given loading cycle. We found that modest errors in tibial force translated into large errors in bone damage estimates. For example, a 9.9% error in tibial force using VALR translated into 104% error in estimated bone damage. Encouragingly, the physics-based and machine learning algorithms reduced damage errors to 41% and 18%, respectively. This study highlights the exciting potential to combine wearables, musculoskeletal biomechanics and machine learning to develop more accurate tools for monitoring musculoskeletal loading in applied situations.
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.