ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Optimization of MIMU Mounting Position on Shank in Posture Estimation Considering Muscle Protuberance.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The influence of the mounting position of a magnetic-inertial measurement unit (MIMU) on the accuracy of posture estimation for a shank has not been extensively studied and remains unknown. In this study, we conducted comparative experiments using three MIMU positions: the lateral and frontal positions, which are commonly used, and the medial tibial position, which is less affected by muscle protuberance, considering the anatomical structure of the body. To determine the optimal MIMU mounting position on the shank, we repeatedly performed plantar-dorsiflexion and relaxation of the ankle joint in a chair-sitting position and examined the effect of muscle contraction on the posture of the MIMU (Experiment 1). We also performed posture estimation during gait and compared the three-dimensional shank posture measured by the MIMU and optical motion capture to evaluate the estimation accuracy for each mounting position (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, the orientation change at the medial tibia was significantly smaller than that at the other positions, showing an 80% reduction compared with the anterior tibia during dorsiflexion. In Experiment 2, the medial tibia achieved the highest estimation accuracy, showing a 13% lower RMSE than that of the anterior position. The results of these two experiments suggest that the medial tibia is the optimal position on the shank, as the posture estimation accuracy was the highest when the MIMU was mounted on the medial tibia, where there was no muscle under the mounting surface. Moreover, the posture estimation accuracy was less affected by muscle protuberance under these conditions.
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.