ArticlePloS one2023
Robust deep learning-based gait event detection across various pathologies.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [AI in instrumental gait analysis : Challenges and solution approaches].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Pooled it
- The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Idiopathic Clubfoot: A Scoping Review.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Article
- Deep Learning-Based Temporal Gait Analysis Using a Smartphone IMU in Older Adults with and Without Non-Specific Low Back Pain.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Markerless gait analysis for children and adolescents with juvenile idiopathic arthritis using a machine learning pipeline.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2026Article
- Validation of AI-based markerless gait event detection during perturbed walking using smartphone videos from two camera perspectives.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Assessment of reliability and concurrent validity of a single trunk-based IMU system to quantify spatiotemporal parameters in healthy individuals.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Automatic detection of human gait events: a simple but versatile 3D algorithm.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- GaitRec-VR: 3D Gait Analysis for Walking Overground with and without a Head-Mounted-Display in Virtual Reality.Scientific data · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The correct estimation of gait events is essential for the interpretation and calculation of 3D gait analysis (3DGA) data. Depending on the severity of the underlying pathology and the availability of force plates, gait events can be set either manually by trained clinicians or detected by automated event detection algorithms. The downside of manually estimated events is the tedious and time-intensive work which leads to subjective assessments. For automated event detection algorithms, the drawback is, that there is no standardized method available. Algorithms show varying robustness and accuracy on different pathologies and are often dependent on setup or pathology-specific thresholds. In this paper, we aim at closing this gap by introducing a novel deep learning-based gait event detection algorithm called IntellEvent, which shows to be accurate and robust across multiple pathologies. For this study, we utilized a retrospective clinical 3DGA dataset of 1211 patients with four different pathologies (malrotation deformities of the lower limbs, club foot, infantile cerebral palsy (ICP), and ICP with only drop foot characteristics) and 61 healthy controls. We propose a recurrent neural network architecture based on long-short term memory (LSTM) and trained it with 3D position and velocity information to predict initial contact (IC) and foot off (FO) events. We compared IntellEvent to a state-of-the-art heuristic approach and a machine learning method called DeepEvent. IntellEvent outperforms both methods and detects IC events on average within 5.4 ms and FO events within 11.3 ms with a detection rate of ≥ 99% and ≥ 95%, respectively. Our investigation on generalizability across laboratories suggests that models trained on data from a different laboratory need to be applied with care due to setup variations or differences in capturing frequencies.
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.