ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Personalised Gait Recognition for People with Neurological Conditions.
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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contribution of artificial intelligence research to the development of inclusive applications for people with disabilities: A scoping review (2015-2025).PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- From Verbal Reports to Personalized Activity Trackers: Understanding the Challenges of Ground Truth Data Collection with Older Adults in the Wild.Proceedings of the ACM on interactive, mobile, wearable and ubiquitous technologies · 2025Article
- Co-simulation of human digital twins and wearable inertial sensors to analyse gait event estimation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is growing interest in monitoring gait patterns in people with neurological conditions. The democratisation of wearable inertial sensors has enabled the study of gait in free living environments. One pivotal aspect of gait assessment in uncontrolled environments is the ability to accurately recognise gait instances. Previous work has focused on wavelet transform methods or general machine learning models to detect gait; the former assume a comparable gait pattern between people and the latter assume training datasets that represent a diverse population. In this paper, we argue that these approaches are unsuitable for people with severe motor impairments and their distinct gait patterns, and make the case for a lightweight personalised alternative. We propose an approach that builds on top of a general model, fine-tuning it with personalised data. A comparative proof-of-concept evaluation with general machine learning (NN and CNN) approaches and personalised counterparts showed that the latter improved the overall accuracy in 3.5% for the NN and 5.3% for the CNN. More importantly, participants that were ill-represented by the general model (the most extreme cases) had the recognition of gait instances improved by up to 16.9% for NN and 20.5% for CNN with the personalised approaches. It is common to say that people with neurological conditions, such as Parkinson's disease, present very individual motor patterns, and that in a sense they are all outliers; we expect that our results will motivate researchers to explore alternative approaches that value personalisation rather than harvesting datasets that are may be able to represent these differences.
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.