ArticleComputational and structural biotechnology journal2023
Modeling biological individuality using machine learning: A study on human gait.
Article in Computational and structural biotechnology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recognition of Human Gait Under Asymmetric Loading.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- NONAN GaitPrint: An IMU gait database of healthy middle-aged adults.Scientific data · 2025Article
- The individuality of plantar pressure indices enables the reduction of descriptive gait data required for diagnostic purposes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Modelling individual variation in human walking gait across populations and walking conditions via gait recognition.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024Article
- Unveiling the acute neurophysiological responses to strength training: An exploratory study on novices performing weightlifting bouts with different motor learning models.Biology of sport · 2024Article
- Unveiling individuality in the early phase of motor learning: a machine learning approach for analysing weightlifting technique in novices.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Resonance Effects in Variable Practice for Handball, Basketball, and Volleyball Skills: A Study on Contextual Interference and Differential Learning.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Identification of subject-specific responses to footwear during running.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Identifying underlying individuality across running, walking, and handwriting patterns with conditional cycle-consistent generative adversarial networks.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human gait is a complex and unique biological process that can offer valuable insights into an individual's health and well-being. In this work, we leverage a machine learning-based approach to model individual gait signatures and identify factors contributing to inter-individual variability in gait patterns. We provide a comprehensive analysis of gait individuality by (1) demonstrating the uniqueness of gait signatures in a large-scale dataset and (2) highlighting the gait characteristics that are most distinctive to each individual. We utilized the data from three publicly available datasets comprising 5368 bilateral ground reaction force recordings during level overground walking from 671 distinct healthy individuals. Our results show that individuals can be identified with a prediction accuracy of 99.3% by using the bilateral signals of all three ground reaction force components, with only 10 out of 1342 recordings in our test data being misclassified. This indicates that the combination of bilateral ground reaction force signals with all three components provides a more comprehensive and accurate representation of an individual's gait signature. The highest accuracy was achieved by (linear) Support Vector Machines (99.3%), followed by Random Forests (98.7%), Convolutional Neural Networks (95.8%), and Decision Trees (82.8%). The proposed approach provides a powerful tool to better understand biological individuality and has potential applications in personalized healthcare, clinical diagnosis, and therapeutic interventions.
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.