ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Validation and Analysis of Recreational Runners' Kinematics Obtained from a Sacral IMU.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Establishment of Reference Values for Selected Spatiotemporal and Kinematic Running Parameters in Healthy Adult Recreational Runners from Barranquilla, Colombia.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Real-Time Gait Analysis of the Pelvis and Lower Limbs Using a Seven-Node IMU Network.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sex Differences in Speed-Related Running Mechanics Using IMU in Runners.Translational sports medicine · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our aim was to validate a sacral-mounted inertial measurement unit (IMU) for reconstructing running kinematics and comparing movement patterns within and between runners. IMU data were processed using Kalman and complementary filters separately. RMSE and Bland-Altman analysis assessed the validity of each filtering method against a motion capture system. Running data from 24 recreational runners were analyzed using Fourier transform coefficients, PCA, and k-means clustering. High agreement was found for Kalman-filtered data in the frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes, with a Bland-Altman bias of ~2 mm on average, compared to a bias of ~10.5 mm for complementary-filtered data. Pelvic angles calculated from Kalman-filtered data had superior agreement, with systematic biases of ~0.3 versus 3.4 degrees for complementary-filtered data. Our findings suggest that inertial sensors are viable alternatives to motion capture for reconstructing pelvic running kinematics and movement patterns. In the second part of our study, negligible intra-individual differences were observed with changes in speed, while inter-individual differences were large. Two clusters of runners were identified, each showing distinct movement patterns and ranges of motion. These observations highlight the potential usefulness of inertial sensors for performance analysis and rehabilitation as they may permit the use of individual-specific and cluster-specific practice programs.
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.