ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
The Effect of Sensor Feature Inputs on Joint Angle Prediction across Simple Movements.
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 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.
- Real-Time Prediction of Lower-Limb Joint Kinematics, Kinetics, and Ground Reaction Force Using Wearable Sensors and Machine Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- A Hierarchical-Based Learning Approach for Multi-Action Intent Recognition.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Performance of Joint Angle Estimation Algorithms on an Exoskeleton Mock-Up via a Modular Testing Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Abstract
The use of wearable sensors, such as inertial measurement units (IMUs), and machine learning for human intent recognition in health-related areas has grown considerably. However, there is limited research exploring how IMU quantity and placement affect human movement intent prediction (HMIP) at the joint level. The objective of this study was to analyze various combinations of IMU input signals to maximize the machine learning prediction accuracy for multiple simple movements. We trained a Random Forest algorithm to predict future joint angles across these movements using various sensor features. We hypothesized that joint angle prediction accuracy would increase with the addition of IMUs attached to adjacent body segments and that non-adjacent IMUs would not increase the prediction accuracy. The results indicated that the addition of adjacent IMUs to current joint angle inputs did not significantly increase the prediction accuracy (RMSE of 1.92° vs. 3.32° at the ankle, 8.78° vs. 12.54° at the knee, and 5.48° vs. 9.67° at the hip). Additionally, including non-adjacent IMUs did not increase the prediction accuracy (RMSE of 5.35° vs. 5.55° at the ankle, 20.29° vs. 20.71° at the knee, and 14.86° vs. 13.55° at the hip). These results demonstrated how future joint angle prediction during simple movements did not improve with the addition of IMUs alongside current joint angle inputs.
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.