ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Reliability and Validity of the OneStep Smartphone Application for Gait Analysis among Patients Undergoing Rehabilitation for Unilateral Lower Limb Disability.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validity and Reliability of a Smartphone-Based Gait Assessment in Measuring Temporal Gait Parameters: Challenges and Recommendations.Biosensors · 2025Article
- Psychometric Characteristics of Smartphone-Based Gait Analyses in Chronic Health Conditions: A Systematic Review.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
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
Abstract
An easy-to-use and reliable tool is essential for gait assessment of people with gait pathologies. This study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of the OneStep smartphone application compared to the C-Mill-VR+ treadmill (Motek, Nederlands), among patients undergoing rehabilitation for unilateral lower extremity disability. Spatiotemporal gait parameters were extracted from the treadmill and from two smartphones, one on each leg. Inter-device reliability was evaluated using Pearson correlation, intra-cluster correlation coefficient (ICC), and Cohen's d, comparing the application's readings from the two phones. Validity was assessed by comparing readings from each phone to the treadmill. Twenty-eight patients completed the study; the median age was 45.5 years, and 61% were males. The ICC between the phones showed a high correlation (r = 0.89-1) and good-to-excellent reliability (ICC range, 0.77-1) for all the gait parameters examined. The correlations between the phones and the treadmill were mostly above 0.8. The ICC between each phone and the treadmill demonstrated moderate-to-excellent validity for all the gait parameters (range, 0.58-1). Only 'step length of the impaired leg' showed poor-to-good validity (range, 0.37-0.84). Cohen's d effect size was small (d < 0.5) for all the parameters. The studied application demonstrated good reliability and validity for spatiotemporal gait assessment in patients with unilateral lower limb disability.
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.