ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
An Automatic Gait Analysis Pipeline for Wearable Sensors: A Pilot Study in Parkinson's Disease.
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of Deep Learning and Gait Analysis in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Pooled it
- Postoperative Gait Characteristics After Arthroscopic Ankle Arthrodesis Using a Deep Learning-Based Markerless Motion Capture System: A Pilot Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- AI-Enabled Wearables for Motor Function Assessment and Rehabilitation in Parkinson Disease: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Review
- In-Clinic and Natural Gait Observations master protocol (I-CAN-GO) to validate gait using a lumbar accelerometer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Wearable sensor devices can automatically identify the ON-OFF status of patients with Parkinson's disease through an interpretable machine learning model.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Enhancing Wearable Gait Monitoring Systems: Identifying Optimal Kinematic Inputs in Typical Adolescents.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Gait Monitoring and Analysis: A Mathematical Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Machine Learning Techniques for Developing Remotely Monitored Central Nervous System Biomarkers Using Wearable Sensors: A Narrative Literature Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Validity and reliability of the Apple Health app on iPhone for measuring gait parameters in children, adults, and seniors.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Validity and Reliability of a Smartphone App for Gait and Balance Assessment.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The use of wearable sensors allows continuous recordings of physical activity from participants in free-living or at-home clinical studies. The large amount of data collected demands automatic analysis pipelines to extract gait parameters that can be used as clinical endpoints. We introduce a deep learning-based automatic pipeline for wearables that processes tri-axial accelerometry data and extracts gait events-bout segmentation, initial contact (IC), and final contact (FC)-from a single sensor located at either the lower back (near L5), shin or wrist. The gait events detected are posteriorly used for gait parameter estimation, such as step time, length, and symmetry. We report results from a leave-one-subject-out (LOSO) validation on a pilot study dataset of five participants clinically diagnosed with Parkinson's disease (PD) and six healthy controls (HC). Participants wore sensors at three body locations and walked on a pressure-sensing walkway to obtain reference gait data. Mean absolute errors (MAE) for the IC events ranged from 22.82 to 33.09 milliseconds (msecs) for the lower back sensor while for the shin and wrist sensors, MAE ranges were 28.56-64.66 and 40.19-72.50 msecs, respectively. For the FC-event detection, MAE ranges were 29.06-48.42, 40.19-72.70 and 36.06-60.18 msecs for the lumbar, wrist and shin sensors, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients, ICC(2,k), between the estimated parameters and the reference data resulted in good-to-excellent agreement (ICC ≥ 0.84) for the lumbar and shin sensors, excluding the double support time (ICC = 0.37 lumbar and 0.38 shin) and swing time (ICC = 0.55 lumbar and 0.59 shin). The wrist sensor also showed good agreements, but the ICCs were lower overall than for the other two sensors. Our proposed analysis pipeline has the potential to extract up to 100 gait-related parameters, and we expect our contribution will further support developments in the fields of wearable sensors, digital health, and remote monitoring in clinical trials.
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.