Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35408399›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

A Deep Learning Method for Foot Progression Angle Detection in Plantar Pressure Images.

Peter Ardhianto, Raden Bagus Reinaldy Subiakto, Chih-Yang Lin, Yih-Kuen Jan, Ben-Yi Liau, Jen-Yung Tsai, Veit Babak Hamun Akbari, Chi-Wen Lung

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Towards toxic and narcotic medication detection with rotated object detectors.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Decision Tree-Based Foot Orthosis Prescription for Patients with Pes Planus.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. 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 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Peter ArdhiantoDepartment of Visual Communication Design, Soegijapranata Catholic University, Semarang 50234, Indonesia.ORCID 0000-0002-1492-7689
Raden Bagus Reinaldy SubiaktoDepartment of Mathematics, Airlangga University, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia.
Chih-Yang LinDepartment of Electrical Engineering, Yuan Ze University, Chung-Li 32003, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-0401-8473
Yih-Kuen JanRehabilitation Engineering Lab, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7149-4034
Ben-Yi LiauDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Hungkuang University, Taichung 433304, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0002-6857-8656
Jen-Yung TsaiDepartment of Digital Media Design, Asia University, Taichung 413305, Taiwan.
Veit Babak Hamun AkbariDepartment of Creative Product Design, Asia University, Taichung 413305, Taiwan.
Chi-Wen LungRehabilitation Engineering Lab, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7048-2493
Asia University · TWAirlangga University · IDHungkuang University · TWUniversity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · USYuan Ze University · TW

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of China MOST 110-2221-E-155-039-MY3Ministry of Science and Technology of the Republic of China MOST 110-2221-E-468-005
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Foot progression angle (FPA) analysis is one of the core methods to detect gait pathologies as basic information to prevent foot injury from excessive in-toeing and out-toeing. Deep learning-based object detection can assist in measuring the FPA through plantar pressure images. This study aims to establish a precision model for determining the FPA. The precision detection of FPA can provide information with in-toeing, out-toeing, and rearfoot kinematics to evaluate the effect of physical therapy programs on knee pain and knee osteoarthritis. We analyzed a total of 1424 plantar images with three different You Only Look Once (YOLO) networks: YOLO v3, v4, and v5x, to obtain a suitable model for FPA detection. YOLOv4 showed higher performance of the profile-box, with average precision in the left foot of 100.00% and the right foot of 99.78%, respectively. Besides, in detecting the foot angle-box, the ground-truth has similar results with YOLOv4 (5.58 ± 0.10° vs. 5.86 ± 0.09°, p = 0.013). In contrast, there was a significant difference in FPA between ground-truth vs. YOLOv3 (5.58 ± 0.10° vs. 6.07 ± 0.06°, p < 0.001), and ground-truth vs. YOLOv5x (5.58 ± 0.10° vs. 6.75 ± 0.06°, p < 0.001). This result implies that deep learning with YOLOv4 can enhance the detection of FPA.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMetatarsal ValgusMetatarsus VarusBiomechanical PhenomenaFootGaitHumansangle parameterfoot clinicfoot problemsobject detectionYOLO

Identifiers

PMID35408399
PMCPMC9003219
OpenAlexW4223644948

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.