Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36572764›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Evaluation of center of mass estimation for obese using statically equivalent serial chain.

Elie Chebel, Burcu Tunc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Elie ChebelDepartment of Computer Engineering, Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, 34353, Turkey. elie.chebel@bahcesehir.edu.tr.
Burcu TuncDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Bahcesehir University, Istanbul, 34353, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The complex structure of the human body makes its center of mass (CoM) estimation very challenging. The typically used estimation methods usually suffer from large estimation errors when applied to bodies with structural differences. Thus, a reliable estimation method is of utmost importance. In this paper, we present a detailed evaluation of a subject-specific CoM estimation technique named Statically Equivalent Serial Chain (SESC) by investigating its estimation ability over two different groups of subjects (Fit and Obese) in comparison to the segmental analysis method. For this study, we used an IMU-based motion capture system and a force platform to record the joint angles and corresponding center of pressure (CoP) values of twenty-five participants while performing a series of static postures. The root-mean-square errors (RMSE) of SESC's estimation for both groups showed close and lower mean values, whereas the segmental analysis method showed significantly larger RMSE values in comparison to SESC (p < 0.05). In addition, we used the Bland-Altman analysis to evaluate the agreement between the two techniques and the ground truth CoP, which showed the accuracy, precision, and reliability of SESC over both groups. In contrast, the segmental analysis method did not present neither accurate nor precise estimations, as our analysis revealed considerable fixed and proportional biases.

Indexed as

Motion CapturePostureBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansObesityReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID36572764
PMCPMC9792584

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.