ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2024
Biological reliability of a movement analysis assessment using a markerless motion capture system.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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.
- Multimodal algorithmic fusion model for physical education assessment: spatiotemporal comparison of inertial measurement units and traditional scales.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Synchronization of OpenCap with Force Platforms: Validation of an Event-Based Algorithm.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Advances in motion capture technology include markerless systems to facilitate valid data collection. Recently, the technological reliability of this technology has been reported for human movement assessments. To further understand sources of potential error, biological reliability must also be determined. The aim of this study was to determine the day-to-day reliability for a three-dimensional markerless motion capture (MMC) system to quantify 4 movement analysis composite scores, and 81 kinematic variables. Methods: Twenty-two healthy men ( Results: No differences were observed for any composite score (i.e., athleticism, explosiveness, quality, readiness; or any of the 81 kinematic variables. Furthermore, 84 of 85 measured variables exhibited good to excellent ICCs (0.61-0.99). When compared to previously reported technological variability data, 62.3% of item variability was due to biological variability, with 66 of 85 variables exhibiting biological variability as the primary source of error (i.e., >50% total variability). Discussion: Combined, these findings effectively add to the body of literature suggesting sufficient reliability for MMC solutions in capturing kinematic features of human movement.
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.