Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35161654›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Reliability of IMU-Based Gait Assessment in Clinical Stroke Rehabilitation.

Richard A W Felius, Marieke Geerars, Sjoerd M Bruijn, Jaap H van Dieën, Natasja C Wouda, Michiel Punt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Richard A W FeliusResearch Group Lifestyle and Health, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8904-1471
Marieke GeerarsResearch Group Lifestyle and Health, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Sjoerd M BruijnFaculty of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jaap H van DieënFaculty of Human Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7719-5585
Natasja C WoudaResearch Group Lifestyle and Health, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Michiel PuntResearch Group Lifestyle and Health, Utrecht University of Applied Sciences, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands.
University of Applied Sciences Utrecht · NLVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

SIA-RAAK RAAK.PRO.03.006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGait is often impaired in people after stroke, restricting personal independence and affecting quality of life. During stroke rehabilitation, walking capacity is conventionally assessed by measuring walking distance and speed. Gait features, such as asymmetry and variability, are not routinely determined, but may provide more specific insights into the patient's walking capacity. Inertial measurement units offer a feasible and promising tool to determine these gait features.

objectiveWe examined the test-retest reliability of inertial measurement units-based gait features measured in a two-minute walking assessment in people after stroke and while in clinical rehabilitation.

methodThirty-one people after stroke performed two assessments with a test-retest interval of 24 h. Each assessment consisted of a two-minute walking test on a 14-m walking path. Participants were equipped with three inertial measurement units, placed at both feet and at the low back. In total, 166 gait features were calculated for each assessment, consisting of spatio-temporal (56), frequency (26), complexity (63), and asymmetry (14) features. The reliability was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Additionally, the minimal detectable change and the relative minimal detectable change were computed.

resultsOverall, 107 gait features had good-excellent reliability, consisting of 50 spatio-temporal, 8 frequency, 36 complexity, and 13 symmetry features. The relative minimal detectable change of these features ranged between 0.5 and 1.5 standard deviations.

conclusionGait can reliably be assessed in people after stroke in clinical stroke rehabilitation using three inertial measurement units.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationGaitHumansQuality of LifeReproducibility of ResultsWalkingaccelerometercerebral vascular accidentfunctional gait assessmentgait qualityneurological disorderrecoverysensorswalking

Identifiers

PMID35161654
PMCPMC8839370
OpenAlexW4210264305

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.