Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38628437›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024

Estimating 3D kinematics and kinetics from virtual inertial sensor data through musculoskeletal movement simulations.

Marlies Nitschke, Eva Dorschky, Sigrid Leyendecker, Bjoern M Eskofier, Anne D Koelewijn

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marlies NitschkeMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Engineering (AIBE), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Eva DorschkyMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Engineering (AIBE), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Sigrid LeyendeckerInstitute of Applied Dynamics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Bjoern M EskofierMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Engineering (AIBE), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.
Anne D KoelewijnMachine Learning and Data Analytics Lab, Department Artificial Intelligence in Biomedical Engineering (AIBE), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Portable measurement systems using inertial sensors enable motion capture outside the lab, facilitating longitudinal and large-scale studies in natural environments. However, estimating 3D kinematics and kinetics from inertial data for a comprehensive biomechanical movement analysis is still challenging. Machine learning models or stepwise approaches performing Kalman filtering, inverse kinematics, and inverse dynamics can lead to inconsistencies between kinematics and kinetics. We investigated the reconstruction of 3D kinematics and kinetics of arbitrary running motions from inertial sensor data using optimal control simulations of full-body musculoskeletal models. To evaluate the feasibility of the proposed method, we used marker tracking simulations created from optical motion capture data as a reference and for computing virtual inertial data such that the desired solution was known exactly. We generated the inertial tracking simulations by formulating optimal control problems that tracked virtual acceleration and angular velocity while minimizing effort without requiring a task constraint or an initial state. To evaluate the proposed approach, we reconstructed three trials each of straight running, curved running, and a v-cut of 10 participants. We compared the estimated inertial signals and biomechanical variables of the marker and inertial tracking simulations. The inertial data was tracked closely, resulting in low mean root mean squared deviations for pelvis translation (≤20.2 mm), angles (≤1.8 deg), ground reaction forces (≤1.1 BW%), joint moments (≤0.1 BWBH%), and muscle forces (≤5.4 BW%) and high mean coefficients of multiple correlation for all biomechanical variables

Indexed as

biomechanic analysischange of directioninertial measurement unitsmusculoskeletal modeltrajectory optimizationwearable sensing

Identifiers

PMID38628437
PMCPMC11018991

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.