Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34960379›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

An Automatic Gait Analysis Pipeline for Wearable Sensors: A Pilot Study in Parkinson's Disease.

Luis R Peraza, Kirsi M Kinnunen, Roisin McNaney, Ian J Craddock, Alan L Whone, Catherine Morgan, Richard Joules, Robin Wolz

Open access · goldAbstract 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Gait Monitoring and Analysis: A Mathematical Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Luis R PerazaIXICO, London EC1A 9PN, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3419-0792
Kirsi M KinnunenIXICO, London EC1A 9PN, UK.
Roisin McNaneyDepartment of Human Centred Computing, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3761-296X
Ian J CraddockElectrical and Electronic Engineering, School of Computer Science, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1QU, UK.
Alan L WhoneTranslational Health Sciences, University of Bristol Medical School, Bristol BS8 1QU, UK.
Catherine MorganTranslational Health Sciences, University of Bristol Medical School, Bristol BS8 1QU, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0333-2417
Richard JoulesIXICO, London EC1A 9PN, UK.
Robin WolzIXICO, London EC1A 9PN, UK.
Ixico (United Kingdom) · GBNorth Bristol NHS Trust · GBMonash University · AUUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/ R005273/1IXICO R101507-101The Cure Parkinson's Trust AW021Wellcome Trust 204813/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

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

Parkinson DiseaseWearable Electronic DevicesGaitGait AnalysisHumansPilot Projectsaccelerometrydeep learningfree livinginitial contactstep lengthtoe-off

Identifiers

PMID34960379
PMCPMC8707484
OpenAlexW4200259610

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.