Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38540019›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Objective Assessment of Equine Locomotor Symmetry Using an Inertial Sensor System and Artificial Intelligence: A Comparative Study.

Natalie Calle-González, Chiara Maria Lo Feudo, Francesco Ferrucci, Francisco Requena, Luca Stucchi, Ana Muñoz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Natalie Calle-GonzálezDepartment of Animal Medicine and Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Córdoba, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.
Chiara Maria Lo FeudoEquine Sports Medicine Laboratory "Franco Tradati", Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9964-2753
Francesco FerrucciEquine Sports Medicine Laboratory "Franco Tradati", Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7285-9880
Francisco RequenaEquine Sport Medicine Center CEMEDE, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Córdoba, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7890-2635
Luca StucchiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sassari, 07100 Sassari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2056-5426
Ana MuñozDepartment of Animal Medicine and Surgery, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Córdoba, 14004 Córdoba, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-8613-8059
University of Córdoba · ESUniversity of Milan · ITUniversity of Sassari · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In horses, quantitative assessment of gait parameters, as with the use of inertial measurement units (IMUs) systems, might help in the decision-making process. However, it requires financial investment, is time-consuming, and lacks accuracy if displaced. An innovative artificial intelligence marker-less motion tracking system (AI-MTS) may overcome these limitations in the field. Our aim was to compare the level of agreement and accuracy between both systems and visual clinical assessment. Twenty horses underwent locomotion analysis by visual assessment, IMUs, and AI-MTS systems, under the following conditions: straight hard (SH), straight soft (SS), left and right circle hard (LCH, RCH), and soft (LCS, RCS). A greater number of horses were considered sound by clinical examination, compared to those identified as symmetric by the two gait analysis systems. More limbs were considered asymmetric by the AI-MTS compared to IMUs, suggesting its greater sensitivity. The greatest agreement between the two systems was found for the difference between two minima in vertical head position in SH, while the lowest for the difference between two minima in vertical pelvis position in SS, reflecting the difficulties in assessing asymmetry of the hindlimbs. It is unknown what degree of asymmetry is clinically relevant, suggesting that more consistent use in training horses may help determine the thresholds for asymmetry. Some degree of asymmetry may be clinically relevant, suggesting its regular use in training horses.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencegait analysishorseinertial measurement unit systemlamenesslocomotion

Identifiers

PMID38540019
PMCPMC10967470
OpenAlexW4392926795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.