ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Ecological validity of a deep learning algorithm to detect gait events from real-life walking bouts in mobility-limiting diseases.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- Wearable Sensors in Gait Assessment for Parkinson Disease and Stroke in Real-World Environments: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- IMU-based gait analysis methods: a systematic review of techniques for different body locations.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Review
- Mobile Spatiotemporal Gait Segmentation Using an Ear-Worn Motion Sensor and Deep Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Inter-joint coordination with and without dopaminergic medication in Parkinson's disease: a case-control study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 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
49 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The clinical assessment of mobility, and walking specifically, is still mainly based on functional tests that lack ecological validity. Thanks to inertial measurement units (IMUs), gait analysis is shifting to unsupervised monitoring in naturalistic and unconstrained settings. However, the extraction of clinically relevant gait parameters from IMU data often depends on heuristics-based algorithms that rely on empirically determined thresholds. These were mainly validated on small cohorts in supervised settings. Methods: Here, a deep learning (DL) algorithm was developed and validated for gait event detection in a heterogeneous population of different mobility-limiting disease cohorts and a cohort of healthy adults. Participants wore pressure insoles and IMUs on both feet for 2.5 h in their habitual environment. The raw accelerometer and gyroscope data from both feet were used as input to a deep convolutional neural network, while reference timings for gait events were based on the combined IMU and pressure insoles data. Results and discussion: The results showed a high-detection performance for initial contacts (ICs) (recall: 98%, precision: 96%) and final contacts (FCs) (recall: 99%, precision: 94%) and a maximum median time error of -0.02 s for ICs and 0.03 s for FCs. Subsequently derived temporal gait parameters were in good agreement with a pressure insoles-based reference with a maximum mean difference of 0.07, -0.07, and <0.01 s for stance, swing, and stride time, respectively. Thus, the DL algorithm is considered successful in detecting gait events in ecologically valid environments across different mobility-limiting diseases.
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.