ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparing the Drop Vertical Jump Tracking Performance of the Azure Kinect to the Kinect V2.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Traditional motion analysis systems are impractical for widespread screening of non-contact anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. The Kinect V2 has been identified as a portable and reliable alternative but was replaced by the Azure Kinect. We hypothesize that the Azure Kinect will assess drop vertical jump (DVJ) parameters associated with ACL injury risk with similar accuracy to its predecessor, the Kinect V2. Sixty-nine participants performed DVJs while being recorded by both the Azure Kinect and the Kinect V2 simultaneously. Our software analyzed the data to identify initial coronal, peak coronal, and peak sagittal knee angles. Agreement between the two systems was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). There was poor agreement between the Azure Kinect and the Kinect V2 for initial and peak coronal angles (ICC values ranging from 0.135 to 0.446), and moderate agreement for peak sagittal angles (ICC = 0.608, 0.655 for left and right knees, respectively). At this point in time, the Azure Kinect system is not a reliable successor to the Kinect V2 system for assessment of initial coronal, peak coronal, and peak sagittal angles during a DVJ, despite demonstrating superior tracking of continuous knee angles. Alternative motion analysis systems should be explored.
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.