Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36433376›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Sofigait-A Wireless Inertial Sensor-Based Gait Sonification System.

Dagmar Linnhoff, Roy Ploigt, Klaus Mattes

Abstract 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Sonification for Personalised Gait Intervention.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  4. 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

3 authors.

Dagmar LinnhoffInstitute of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, 20148 Hamburg, Germany.
Roy PloigtBeSB GmbH Berlin, 12203 Berlin, Germany.
Klaus MattesInstitute of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, 20148 Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, a prototype of an inertial sensor-based gait sonification system was tested for the purpose of providing real-time gait feedback on the knee angle. The study consisted of two parts: (1) a comparison of the knee angle measurement to a marker-based 3D optical capturing system (Vicon, Oxford, UK) with N = 24 participants and (2) an evaluation four different sonification feedback versions in an accentuation × pitch (2 × 2) design on a sample of N = 28 participants. For the measurement system comparison, the RMSE was 7.6° ± 2.6° for the left and 6.9° ± 3.1° for the right side. Measurement agreement with bias up to −7.5° ± 6.2° (for maximum knee flexion) was indicated by the Bland−Altmann Method. The SPM revealed significant differences between both measurement systems for the area 45−90% (p < 0.001) (left) and the area between 45% and 80% (p = 0.007) (right). For the sonification perception, the variation of pitch had a significant effect on the perception of pleasantness of the sound. No effect was found for the accentuation of the swing or stance phase.

Indexed as

GaitKnee JointBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansKneeRange of Motion, Articularacoustic feedbackgait patientsknee anglemeasurement system comparisonsonificationsound design

Identifiers

PMID36433376
PMCPMC9698922

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.