ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparison of Six Sensor Fusion Algorithms with Electrogoniometer Estimation of Wrist Angle in Simulated Work Tasks.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hand-intensive work is strongly associated with work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) of the hand/wrist and other upper body regions across diverse occupations, including office work, manufacturing, services, and healthcare. Addressing the prevalence of WMSDs requires reliable and practical exposure measurements. Traditional methods like electrogoniometry and optical motion capture, while reliable, are expensive and impractical for field use. In contrast, small inertial measurement units (IMUs) may provide a cost-effective, time-efficient, and user-friendly alternative for measuring hand/wrist posture during real work. This study compared six orientation algorithms for estimating wrist angles with an electrogoniometer, the current gold standard in field settings. Six participants performed five simulated hand-intensive work tasks (involving considerable wrist velocity and/or hand force) and one standardised hand movement. Three multiplicative Kalman filter algorithms with different smoothers and constraints showed the highest agreement with the goniometer. These algorithms exhibited median correlation coefficients of 0.75-0.78 for flexion/extension and 0.64 for radial/ulnar deviation across the six subjects and five tasks. They also ranked in the top three for the lowest mean absolute differences from the goniometer at the 10th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of wrist flexion/extension (9.3°, 2.9°, and 7.4°, respectively). Although the results of this study are not fully acceptable for practical field use, especially for some work tasks, they indicate that IMU-based wrist angle estimation may be useful in occupational risk assessments after further improvements.
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.