ArticlePloS one2024
Assessing the validity of the zero-velocity update method for sprinting speeds.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality Assessment of a Foot-Mounted Inertial Measurement Unit System to Measure On-Field Spatiotemporal Acceleration Metrics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Validity and Reliability of Inertial Motion Unit-Based Performance Metrics During Wheelchair Racing Propulsion.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Evaluating the relationship between negative foot speed and sprint performance using shoe-mounted inertial sensors.PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The zero-velocity update (ZUPT) method has become a popular approach to estimate foot kinematics from foot worn inertial measurement units (IMUs) during walking and running. However, the accuracy of the ZUPT method for stride parameters at sprinting speeds remains unknown, specifically when using sensors with characteristics well suited for sprinting (i.e., high accelerometer and gyroscope ranges and sampling rates). Seventeen participants performed 80-meter track sprints while wearing a Blue Trident IMeasureU IMU. Two cameras, at 20 and 70 meters from the start, were used to validate the ZUPT method on a stride-by-stride and on a cumulative distance basis. In particular, the validity of the ZUPT method was assessed for: (1) estimating a single stride length attained near the end of an 80m sprint (i.e., stride at 70m); (2) estimating cumulative distance from ∼20 to ∼70 m; and (3) estimating total distance traveled for an 80-meter track sprint. Individual stride length errors at the 70-meter mark were within -6% to 3%, with a bias of -0.27%. Cumulative distance errors were within -4 to 2%, with biases ranging from -0.85 to -1.22%. The results of this study demonstrate the ZUPT method provides accurate estimates of stride length and cumulative distance traveled for sprinting speeds.
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.