Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35009627›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Optimizing Calibration Procedure to Train a Regression-Based Prediction Model of Actively Generated Lumbar Muscle Moments for Exoskeleton Control.

Ali Tabasi, Maria Lazzaroni, Niels P Brouwer, Idsart Kingma, Wietse van Dijk, Michiel P de Looze, Stefano Toxiri, Jesús Ortiz, Jaap H van Dieën

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ali TabasiDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1680-9010
Maria LazzaroniDepartment of Advanced Robotics, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16163 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1548-7005
Niels P BrouwerDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-7613-9947
Idsart KingmaDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wietse van DijkTNO, 2316ZL Leiden, The Netherlands.
Michiel P de LoozeTNO, 2316ZL Leiden, The Netherlands.
Stefano ToxiriDepartment of Advanced Robotics, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16163 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6104-7385
Jesús OrtizDepartment of Advanced Robotics, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16163 Genova, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-9475-1945
Jaap H van DieënDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7719-5585
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NLItalian Institute of Technology · ITNetherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research · NL

Funding

Dutch Research Council project P16-05Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research i-Botics Early Research Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The risk of low-back pain in manual material handling could potentially be reduced by back-support exoskeletons. Preferably, the level of exoskeleton support relates to the required muscular effort, and therefore should be proportional to the moment generated by trunk muscle activities. To this end, a regression-based prediction model of this moment could be implemented in exoskeleton control. Such a model must be calibrated to each user according to subject-specific musculoskeletal properties and lifting technique variability through several calibration tasks. Given that an extensive calibration limits the practical feasibility of implementing this approach in the workspace, we aimed to optimize the calibration for obtaining appropriate predictive accuracy during work-related tasks, i.e., symmetric lifting from the ground, box stacking, lifting from a shelf, and pulling/pushing. The root-mean-square error (RMSE) of prediction for the extensive calibration was 21.9 nm (9% of peak moment) and increased up to 35.0 nm for limited calibrations. The results suggest that a set of three optimally selected calibration trials suffice to approach the extensive calibration accuracy. An optimal calibration set should cover each extreme of the relevant lifting characteristics, i.e., mass lifted, lifting technique, and lifting velocity. The RMSEs for the optimal calibration sets were below 24.8 nm (10% of peak moment), and not substantially different than that of the extensive calibration.

Indexed as

Exoskeleton DeviceBiomechanical PhenomenaCalibrationElectromyographyLiftingLumbosacral RegionMuscle, Skeletalback-support exoskeletonsexoskeleton controlload prediction modeloptimal calibration

Identifiers

PMID35009627
PMCPMC8747305
OpenAlexW4200482555

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.