ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Influence of the Camera Viewing Angle on OpenPose Validity in Motion Analysis.
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 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.
- Article
- Evaluation Protocols and Validation for Cameras in Indoor Healthcare Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative Analysis of Markerless Motion-Capture Models for Assessing Football Kinematics During 30 m Long-Pass Tasks.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- AI-assisted video analysis of the Trendelenburg test: a feasibility study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Validity of multiple human pose estimation tools for measuring knee impact angles in video-captured falls of older adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparing the Accuracy of Markerless Motion Analysis and Optoelectronic System for Measuring Gait Kinematics of Lower Limb.Bioengineering (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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: With human pose estimation on the rise in the field of biomechanics, the need for scientific investigation of those algorithms is becoming evident. The validity of several of those algorithms has been presented in the literature. However, there is only limited research investigating the applicability of human pose estimation outside the lab. The aim of this research was to quantify the effect of deviating from the standard camera setup used in biomechanics research. (2) Methods: Video data from four camera viewing angles were recorded and keypoints estimated using OpenPose. Kinematic data were compared against a gold-standard marker-based motion capture system to quantify the effect of the camera viewing angle on the validity of joint angle estimation of the knee, hip, elbow and shoulder joints. (3) Results: The results of this study showed reasonable correlations between the joint angles of OpenPose and the gold standard, except for the shoulder. However, the analysis also revealed significant biases when comparing the joint angles inferred from the different viewing angles. In general, back-viewing cameras performed best and resulted in the lowest percental deviations. (4) Conclusions: The findings of this study underscore the importance of conducting a detailed examination of individual movements before proposing specific camera angles for users in diverse settings.
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.