Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33442580›Full record

ArticleDigital biomarkers2020

Robust Step Detection from Different Waist-Worn Sensor Positions: Implications for Clinical Studies.

Matthias Tietsch, Amir Muaremi, Ieuan Clay, Felix Kluge, Holger Hoefling, Martin Ullrich, Arne Küderle, Bjoern M Eskofier, Arne Müller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Digital biomarkers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Matthias TietschNovartis Institutes of Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Amir MuaremiNovartis Institutes of Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Ieuan ClayEvidation Health Inc., San Mateo, California, USA.
Felix KlugeMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany.
Holger HoeflingNovartis Institutes of Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Martin UllrichMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany.
Arne KüderleMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany.
Bjoern M EskofierMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Germany.
Arne MüllerNovartis Institutes of Biomedical Research, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analyzing human gait with inertial sensors provides valuable insights into a wide range of health impairments, including many musculoskeletal and neurological diseases. A representative and reliable assessment of gait requires continuous monitoring over long periods and ideally takes place in the subjects' habitual environment (real-world). An inconsistent sensor wearing position can affect gait characterization and influence clinical study results, thus clinical study protocols are typically highly proscriptive, instructing all participants to wear the sensor in a uniform manner. This restrictive approach improves data quality but reduces overall adherence. In this work, we analyze the impact of altering the sensor wearing position around the waist on sensor signal and step detection. We demonstrate that an asymmetrically worn sensor leads to additional odd-harmonic frequency components in the frequency spectrum. We propose a robust solution for step detection based on autocorrelation to overcome sensor position variation (sensitivity = 0.99, precision = 0.99). The proposed solution reduces the impact of inconsistent sensor positioning on gait characterization in clinical studies, thus providing more flexibility to protocol implementation and more freedom to participants to wear the sensor in the position most comfortable to them. This work is a first step towards truly position-agnostic gait assessment in clinical settings.

Indexed as

AutocorrelationGait monitoringInertial sensorStep detectionWaist-worn

Identifiers

PMID33442580
PMCPMC7768099

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.