ArticleInternational orthopaedics2023
Do we still need to screen our patients?-Orthopaedic scoring based on motion tracking.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [AI in instrumental gait analysis : Challenges and solution approaches].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Pooled it
- Precision medicine in orthopaedics: A review of current technologies and future directions.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Review
- [Orthopaedics of the future : AI meets motion analysis: opportunities and risks].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- AN INTELLIGIBLE AI-DRIVEN DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR POSTSTROKE MOBILITY ASSESSMENT.Journal of rehabilitation medicine. Clinical communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOrthopaedic scores are essential for the clinical assessment of movement disorders but require an experienced clinician for the manual scoring. Wearable systems are taking root in the medical field and offer a possibility for the convenient collection of motion tracking data. The purpose of this work is to demonstrate the feasibility of automated orthopaedic scorings based on motion tracking data using the Harris Hip Score and the Knee Society Score as examples.
methodsSeventy-eight patients received a clinical examination and an instrumental gait analysis after hip or knee arthroplasty. Seven hundred forty-four gait features were extracted from each patient's representative gait cycle. For each score, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted with a subsequent tenfold cross-validation. A data split of 70%/30% was applied for training/testing.
resultsBoth scores can be reproduced with excellent coefficients of determination R
conclusionComputing established orthopaedic scores based on motion tracking data yields an automated evaluation of a joint function at the hip and knee which is suitable for direct clinical interpretation. In combination with novel technologies for wearable data collection, these computations can support healthcare staff with objective and telemedical applicable scorings for a large number of patients without the need for trained clinicians.
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.