ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2022
Accuracy and comparison of sensor-based gait speed estimations under standardized and daily life conditions in children undergoing rehabilitation.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of a Pediatric Belt Cane in Children with Cerebral Visual Impairment.Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Monitoring Activity and Gait in Children (MAGIC) using digital health technologies.Pediatric research · 2024Article
- Long-term continuous instrumented insole-based gait analyses in daily life have advantages over longitudinal gait analyses in the lab to monitor healing of tibial fractures.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Acceptability of wearable inertial sensors, completeness of data, and day-to-day variability of everyday life motor activities in children and adolescents with neuromotor impairments.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGait speed is a widely used outcome measure to assess the walking abilities of children undergoing rehabilitation. It is routinely determined during a walking test under standardized conditions, but it remains unclear whether these outcomes reflect the children's performance in daily life. An ankle-worn inertial sensor provides a usable opportunity to measure gait speed in the children's habitual environment. However, sensor-based gait speed estimations need to be accurate to allow for comparison of the children's gait speed between a test situation and daily life. Hence, the first aim of this study was to determine the measurement error of a novel algorithm that estimates gait speed based on data of a single ankle-worn inertial sensor in children undergoing rehabilitation. The second aim of this study was to compare the children's gait speed between standardized and daily life conditions.
methodsTwenty-four children with walking impairments completed four walking tests at different speeds (standardized condition) and were monitored for one hour during leisure or school time (daily life condition). We determined accuracy by comparing sensor-based gait speed estimations with a reference method in both conditions. Eventually, we compared individual gait speeds between the two conditions.
resultsThe measurement error was 0.01 ± 0.07 m/s under the standardized and 0.04 ± 0.06 m/s under the daily life condition. Besides, the majority of children did not use the same speed during the test situation as in daily life.
conclusionThis study demonstrates an accurate method to measure children's gait speed during standardized walking tests and in the children's habitual environment after rehabilitation. It only requires a single ankle sensor, which potentially increases wearing time and data quality of measurements in daily life. We recommend placing the sensor on the less affected side, unless the child wears one orthosis. In this latter case, the sensor should be placed on the side with the orthosis. Moreover, this study showed that most children did not use the same speed in the two conditions, which encourages the use of wearable inertial sensors to assess the children's walking performance in their habitual environment following rehabilitation.
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.