ArticlePeerJ2025
The inter-trial and inter-session reliability of Theia3D-derived markerless gait analysis in tight versus loose clothing.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating psychosocial stress arising from marker-based optical motion capture and subsequent effects on gait.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Restoration of Joint Line Obliquity May Not Influence Lower Extremity Peak Frontal Plane Moments During Stair Negotiation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparison of Marker- and Markerless-Derived Lower Body Three-Dimensional Gait Kinematics in Typically Developing Children.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gait analysis is traditionally conducted using marker-based methods yet markerless motion capture is emerging as an alternative. Initial studies have begun to evaluate the reliability of markerless motion capture yet the evaluation of different clothing conditions across sessions and complete evaluation of the lower limb and pelvis reliability have yet to be considered. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-trial, inter-session and inter-session-clothing variation and root mean square differences between tight- or loose-fitting clothing during walking. Method: Twenty-two healthy adult participants walked along an indoor walkway whilst eight video cameras recorded their gait in either tight- or loose-fitting clothing. A commercial markerless motion capture system (Theia3D) provided gait kinematics for evaluation. Results: Reliability results showed average inter-trial variation of <2°, inter-session variation of <3° and inter-session-clothing variation <3.5°. Root mean square differences (RMSD) between clothing conditions were <2°. Discussion: Pelvis variations were smaller than those at the hip, knee and ankle. Our results showed smaller variation than in previous studies which may be due to updates to software. The demonstration of the reliability of markerless motion capture for gait analysis in healthy adults should prompt further evaluation in clinical conditions and reconsideration of multi-assessor marker-based gait analysis protocols, where variation is highest.
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.