Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39499675›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Center of mass kinematic reconstruction during steady-state walking using optimized template models.

David J Kelly, Patrick M Wensing

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

David J KellyAerospace & Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9284-200X
Patrick M WensingAerospace & Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Template models, such as the Bipedal Spring-Loaded Inverted Pendulum and the Virtual Pivot Point, have been widely used as low-dimensional representations of the complex dynamics in legged locomotion. Despite their ability to qualitatively match human walking characteristics like M-shaped ground reaction force (GRF) profiles, they often exhibit discrepancies when compared to experimental data, notably in overestimating vertical center of mass (CoM) displacement and underestimating gait event timings (touchdown/ liftoff). This paper hypothesizes that the constant leg stiffness of these models explains the majority of these discrepancies. The study systematically investigates the impact of stiffness variations on the fidelity of model fittings to human data, where an optimization framework is employed to identify optimal leg stiffness trajectories. The study also quantifies the effects of stiffness variations on salient characteristics of human walking (GRF profiles and gait event timing). The optimization framework was applied to 24 subjects walking at 40% to 145% preferred walking speed (PWS). The findings reveal that despite only modifying ground forces in one direction, variable leg stiffness models exhibited a >80% reduction in CoM error across both the B-SLIP and VPP models, while also improving prediction of human GRF profiles. However, the accuracy of gait event timing did not consistently show improvement across all conditions. The resulting stiffness profiles mimic walking characteristics of ankle push-off during double support and reduced CoM vaulting during single support.

Indexed as

GaitWalkingAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansLegMaleModels, BiologicalYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39499675
PMCPMC11537374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.