ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Recurrent Deep Network for Gait Phase Identification from EMG Signals During Exoskeleton-Assisted Walking.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-phase and Multi-mode Gait Recognition with Few Channels and Few Features Based on the Fusion of sEMG and Acceleration.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- A Lightweight Frozen Multi-Convolution Dual-Branch Network for Efficient sEMG-Based Gesture Recognition.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Smart exoskeleton-assisted rehabilitation after fracture surgery: closed-loop control, personalized load management, and integrated telemonitoring.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Abnormal Gait Phase Recognition and Limb Angle Prediction in Lower-Limb Exoskeletons.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Deep Learning Models Optimization for Gait Phase Identification from EMG Data During Exoskeleton-Assisted Walking.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Insights into motor impairment assessment using myographic signals with artificial intelligence: a scoping review.Biomedical engineering letters · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lower limb exoskeletons represent a relevant tool for rehabilitating gait in patients with lower limb movement disorders. Partial assistance exoskeletons adaptively provide the joint torque needed, on top of that produced by the patient, for a correct and stable gait, helping the patient to recover an autonomous gait. Thus, the device needs to identify the different phases of the gait cycle to produce precisely timed commands that drive its joint motors appropriately. In this study, EMG signals have been used for gait phase detection considering that EMG activations lead limb kinematics by at least 120 ms. We propose a deep learning model based on bidirectional LSTM to identify stance and swing gait phases from EMG data. We built a dataset of EMG signals recorded at 1500 Hz from four muscles from the dominant leg in a population of 26 healthy subjects walking overground (WO) and walking on a treadmill (WT) using a lower limb exoskeleton. The data were labeled with the corresponding stance or swing gait phase based on limb kinematics provided by inertial motion sensors. The model was studied in three different scenarios, and we explored its generalization abilities and evaluated its applicability to the online processing of EMG data. The training was always conducted on 500-sample sequences from WO recordings of 23 subjects. Testing always involved WO and WT sequences from the remaining three subjects. First, the model was trained and tested on 500 Hz EMG data, obtaining an overall accuracy on the WO and WT test datasets of 92.43% and 91.16%, respectively. The simulation of online operation required 127 ms to preprocess and classify one sequence. Second, the trained model was evaluated against a test set built on 1500 Hz EMG data. The accuracies were lower, yet the processing times were 11 ms faster. Third, we partially retrained the model on a subset of the 1500 Hz training dataset, achieving 87.17% and 89.64% accuracy on the 1500 Hz WO and WT test sets, respectively. Overall, the proposed deep learning model appears to be a valuable candidate for entering the control pipeline of a lower limb rehabilitation exoskeleton in terms of both the achieved accuracy and processing times.
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.