ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Estimating Indicators for Assessing Knee Motion Impairment During Gait Using In-Shoe Motion Sensors: A Feasibility Study.
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.
- Adapting Young Adults' In-Shoe Motion Sensor Gait Models for Knee Evaluation in Older Adults: A Study on Osteoarthritis and Healthy Knees.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knee joint function deterioration significantly impacts quality of life. This study developed estimation models for ten knee indicators using data from in-shoe motion sensors to assess knee movement during everyday activities. Sixty-six healthy young participants were involved, and multivariate linear regression was employed to construct the models. The results showed that eight out of ten models achieved a "fair" to "good" agreement based on intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), with three knee joint angle indicators reaching the "fair" agreement. One temporal indicator model displayed a "good" agreement, while another had a "fair" agreement. For the angular jerk cost indicators, three out of four attained a "fair" or "good" agreement. The model accuracy was generally acceptable, with the mean absolute error ranging from 0.54 to 0.75 times the standard deviation of the true values and errors less than 1% from the true mean values. The significant predictors included the sole-to-ground angles, particularly the foot posture angles in the sagittal and frontal planes. These findings support the feasibility of estimating knee function solely from foot motion data, offering potential for daily life monitoring and rehabilitation applications. However, discrepancies in the two models were influenced by the variance in the baseline knee flexion and sensor placement. Future work will test these models on older and osteoarthritis-affected individuals to evaluate their broader applicability, with prospects for user-tailored rehabilitation applications. This study is a step towards simplified, accessible knee health monitoring through wearable technology.
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.