ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Machine Learning for Optical Motion Capture-Driven Musculoskeletal Modelling from Inertial Motion Capture Data.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Multimodal Dataset of Full-Body Kinematics and Kinetics from Laboratory- and Wearable-Based Systems.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Transfer Learning With Simulated and Recorded Data Improves Predictions of Lateral Pinch Thumb-Tip Forces.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026Article
- Validation of Inertial Measurement Units for Measuring Lower-Extremity Kinematics During Squat-Pivot and Stoop-Twist Lifting Tasks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The analysis of motion recognition model for badminton player movements using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Gait Recognition and Assistance Parameter Prediction Determination Based on Kinematic Information Measured by Inertial Measurement Units.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Predicting Tissue Loads in Running from Inertial Measurement Units.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Marker-based Optical Motion Capture (OMC) systems and associated musculoskeletal (MSK) modelling predictions offer non-invasively obtainable insights into muscle and joint loading at an in vivo level, aiding clinical decision-making. However, an OMC system is lab-based, expensive, and requires a line of sight. Inertial Motion Capture (IMC) techniques are widely-used alternatives, which are portable, user-friendly, and relatively low-cost, although with lesser accuracy. Irrespective of the choice of motion capture technique, one typically uses an MSK model to obtain the kinematic and kinetic outputs, which is a computationally expensive tool increasingly well approximated by machine learning (ML) methods. Here, an ML approach is presented that maps experimentally recorded IMC input data to the human upper-extremity MSK model outputs computed from ('gold standard') OMC input data. Essentially, this proof-of-concept study aims to predict higher-quality MSK outputs from the much easier-to-obtain IMC data. We use OMC and IMC data simultaneously collected for the same subjects to train different ML architectures that predict OMC-driven MSK outputs from IMC measurements. In particular, we employed various neural network (NN) architectures, such as Feed-Forward Neural Networks (FFNNs) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) (vanilla, Long Short-Term Memory, and Gated Recurrent Unit) and a comprehensive search for the best-fit model in the hyperparameters space in both subject-exposed (SE) as well as subject-naive (SN) settings. We observed a comparable performance for both FFNN and RNN models, which have a high degree of agreement (ravg,SE,FFNN=0.90±0.19, ravg,SE,RNN=0.89±0.17, ravg,SN,FFNN=0.84±0.23, and ravg,SN,RNN=0.78±0.23) with the desired OMC-driven MSK estimates for held-out test data. The findings demonstrate that mapping IMC inputs to OMC-driven MSK outputs using ML models could be instrumental in transitioning MSK modelling from 'lab to field'.
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.