ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Three-Dimensional Lower-Limb Kinematics from Accelerometers and Gyroscopes with Simple and Minimal Functional Calibration Tasks: Validation on Asymptomatic Participants.
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 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- IMU- and Vision-Based Measurement Techniques for Joint Kinematics: A Narrative Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Validity, Reliability and Interpretability of an IMU-Based System to Measure 3D Lower Limb Kinematics of Patients with Heterogeneous Gait Disorders.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a Markerless Motion Capture System for Sagittal-Plane Gait Range of Motion.Cureus · 2025Article
- IMU-based segmental root mean square analysis of gait in individuals with cerebellar ataxia: a pilot cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Estimation of the External Knee Adduction Moment Using Inertial Measurement Unit Sensors on the Shank and Lower Back: A Pilot Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Validity of a Single Inertial Measurement Unit to Measure Hip Range of Motion During Gait in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validity of Wearable Inertial Sensors for Gait Analysis: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- A dataset of optical camera and IMU sensor derived kinematics of thirty transtibial prosthesis wearers.Scientific data · 2024Article
- SensAA-Design and Verification of a Cloud-Based Wearable Biomechanical Data Acquisition System.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Sensor-to-Bone Calibration with the Fusion of IMU and Bi-Plane X-rays.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- A convenient approach for knee kinematics assessment using wearable inertial sensors during home-based rehabilitation: Validation with an optoelectronic system.Scientific African · 2023Article
- A dataset of asymptomatic human gait and movements obtained from markers, IMUs, insoles and force plates.Scientific data · 2023Article
- Validity and Reliability of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU)-Derived 3D Joint Kinematics in Persons Wearing Transtibial Prosthesis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Self-Calibrating Magnetometer-Free Inertial Motion Tracking of 2-DoF Joints.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Smart insole-based abnormal gait identification: Deep sequential networks and feature ablation study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The use of inertial measurement units (IMUs) to compute gait outputs, such as the 3D lower-limb kinematics is of huge potential, but no consensus on the procedures and algorithms exists. This study aimed at evaluating the validity of a 7-IMUs system against the optoelectronic system. Ten asymptomatic subjects were included. They wore IMUs on their feet, shanks, thighs and pelvis. The IMUs were embedded in clusters with reflective markers. Reference kinematics was computed from anatomical markers. Gait kinematics was obtained from accelerometer and gyroscope data after sensor orientation estimation and sensor-to-segment (S2S) calibration steps. The S2S calibration steps were also applied to the cluster data. IMU-based and cluster-based kinematics were compared to the reference through root mean square errors (RMSEs), centered RMSEs (after mean removal), correlation coefficients (CCs) and differences in amplitude. The mean RMSE and centered RMSE were, respectively, 7.5° and 4.0° for IMU-kinematics, and 7.9° and 3.8° for cluster-kinematics. Very good CCs were found in the sagittal plane for both IMUs and cluster-based kinematics at the hip, knee and ankle levels (CCs > 0.85). The overall mean amplitude difference was about 7°. These results reflected good accordance in our system with the reference, especially in the sagittal plane, but the presence of offsets requires caution for clinical use.
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.