Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33513999›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Machine-Learning Based Determination of Gait Events from Foot-Mounted Inertial Units.

Matteo Zago, Marco Tarabini, Martina Delfino Spiga, Cristina Ferrario, Filippo Bertozzi, Chiarella Sforza, Manuela Galli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Wearables for Movement Analysis in Healthcare.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Matteo ZagoDipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.
Marco TarabiniDipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2640-1764
Martina Delfino SpigaDipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.
Cristina FerrarioDipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-3350-9829
Filippo BertozziDipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2240-5394
Chiarella SforzaDipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6532-6464
Manuela GalliDipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2772-4837

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A promising but still scarcely explored strategy for the estimation of gait parameters based on inertial sensors involves the adoption of machine learning techniques. However, existing approaches are reliable only for specific conditions, inertial measurements unit (IMU) placement on the body, protocols, or when combined with additional devices. In this paper, we tested an alternative gait-events estimation approach which is fully data-driven and does not rely on a priori models or assumptions. High-frequency (512 Hz) data from a commercial inertial unit were recorded during 500 steps performed by 40 healthy participants. Sensors' readings were synchronized with a reference ground reaction force system to determine initial/terminal contacts. Then, we extracted a set of features from windowed data labeled according to the reference. Two gray-box approaches were evaluated: (1) classifiers (decision trees) returning the presence of a gait event in each time window and (2) a classifier discriminating between stance and swing phases. Both outputs were submitted to a deterministic algorithm correcting spurious clusters of predictions. The stance vs. swing approach estimated the stride time duration with an average error lower than 20 ms and confidence bounds between ±50 ms. These figures are suitable to detect clinically meaningful differences across different populations.

Indexed as

FootGaitMachine LearningAlgorithmsHumansdecision treesgait analysisspatio-temporal parameterswearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID33513999
PMCPMC7866058

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.