ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
Conclusion or Illusion: Quantifying Uncertainty in Inverse Analyses From Marker-Based Motion Capture due to Errors in Marker Registration and Model Scaling.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Portable biomechanics laboratory enables clinically accessible movement analysis from a handheld smartphone.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Musculoskeletal Inverse Kinematics Tool for Inertial Motion Capture Data Based on the Adaptive Unscented Kalman Smoother: An Implementation for OpenSim.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Biomechanics of Human Motion and Its Clinical Applications: Instrumented Gait Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Markerless Approach for Full-Body Biomechanics of Horses.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- The influence of the marker set on inverse kinematics results to inform markerless motion capture annotations.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Validation of Markerless Motion Capture for Soldier Movement Patterns Assessment Under Varying Body-Borne Loads.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- A Data-Driven Approach to Estimate Changes in Peak Knee Contact Force With Exoskeleton Assistance.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2025Article
- Article
- A Method to Track 3D Knee Kinematics by Multi-Channel 3D-Tracked A-Mode Ultrasound.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Muscle-Tendon Unit Length Measurement Using 3D Ultrasound in Passive Conditions: OpenSim Validation and Development of Personalized Models.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- A marker-less human motion analysis system for motion-based biomarker identification and quantification in knee disorders.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Article
- Towards Single Camera Human 3D-Kinematics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Estimating kinematics from optical motion capture with skin-mounted markers, referred to as an inverse kinematic (IK) calculation, is the most common experimental technique in human motion analysis. Kinematics are often used to diagnose movement disorders and plan treatment strategies. In many such applications, small differences in joint angles can be clinically significant. Kinematics are also used to estimate joint powers, muscle forces, and other quantities of interest that cannot typically be measured directly. Thus, the accuracy and reproducibility of IK calculations are critical. In this work, we isolate and quantify the uncertainty in joint angles, moments, and powers due to two sources of error during IK analyses: errors in the placement of markers on the model (marker registration) and errors in the dimensions of the model's body segments (model scaling). We demonstrate that IK solutions are best presented as a distribution of equally probable trajectories when these sources of modeling uncertainty are considered. Notably, a substantial amount of uncertainty exists in the computed kinematics and kinetics even if low marker tracking errors are achieved. For example, considering only 2 cm of marker registration uncertainty, peak ankle plantarflexion angle varied by 15.9°, peak ankle plantarflexion moment varied by 26.6 N⋅m, and peak ankle power at push off varied by 75.9 W during healthy gait. This uncertainty can directly impact the classification of patient movements and the evaluation of training or device effectiveness, such as calculations of push-off power. We provide scripts in OpenSim so that others can reproduce our results and quantify the effect of modeling uncertainty in their own studies.
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.