Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33297395›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Gait Analysis with Wearables Can Accurately Classify Fallers from Non-Fallers: A Step toward Better Management of Neurological Disorders.

Rana Zia Ur Rehman, Yuhan Zhou, Silvia Del Din, Lisa Alcock, Clint Hansen, Yu Guan, Tibor Hortobágyi, Walter Maetzler, Lynn Rochester, Claudine J C Lamoth

Open access · goldAbstract 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 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.5field-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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Systematic review of candidate prognostic factors for falling in older adults identified from motion analysis of challenging walking tasks.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2023
    Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Rana Zia Ur RehmanTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4885-7455
Yuhan ZhouDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3091-1425
Silvia Del DinTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1154-4751
Lisa AlcockTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5PL, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8364-9803
Clint HansenDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4813-3868
Yu GuanSchool of Computing, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5TG, UK.
Tibor HortobágyiDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands.
Walter MaetzlerDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, 24105 Kiel, Germany.
Lynn RochesterTranslational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5PL, UK.
Claudine J C LamothDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, 9713 AV Groningen, The Netherlands.
Newcastle University · GBUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NLUniversity Hospital Schleswig-Holstein · DENewcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation ITN program under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie 721577
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Falls are the leading cause of mortality, morbidity and poor quality of life in older adults with or without neurological conditions. Applying machine learning (ML) models to gait analysis outcomes offers the opportunity to identify individuals at risk of future falls. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of different data pre-processing methods on the performance of ML models to classify neurological patients who have fallen from those who have not for future fall risk assessment. Gait was assessed using wearables in clinic while walking 20 m at a self-selected comfortable pace in 349 (159 fallers, 190 non-fallers) neurological patients. Six different ML models were trained on data pre-processed with three techniques such as standardisation, principal component analysis (PCA) and path signature method. Fallers walked more slowly, with shorter strides and longer stride duration compared to non-fallers. Overall, model accuracy ranged between 48% and 98% with 43-99% sensitivity and 48-98% specificity. A random forest (RF) classifier trained on data pre-processed with the path signature method gave optimal classification accuracy of 98% with 99% sensitivity and 98% specificity. Data pre-processing directly influences the accuracy of ML models for the accurate classification of fallers. Using gait analysis with trained ML models can act as a tool for the proactive assessment of fall risk and support clinical decision-making.

Indexed as

Gait AnalysisNervous System DiseasesWearable Electronic DevicesAccidental FallsAgedFemaleGaitHumansMaleQuality of LifeWalkingclassificationdata pre-processingfallfall risk assessmentgaitinertial measurement unitmachine learningneurological disorderspath signaturewearables

Identifiers

PMID33297395
PMCPMC7729621
OpenAlexW3112793364

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.