ArticleJournal of biomechanics2025
3D motion capture data into a kinematic composite score for assessing musculoskeletal impairments.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Patient-Reported Knee Function Versus Star Excursion Balance Performance as Correlates of Psychological Return-to-Sport Readiness After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biomechanical analysis is essential for understanding and monitoring musculoskeletal impairments, with implications for clinical diagnostics and research. Current clinical methods provide isolated joint measures or qualitative observations, failing to capture motion complexity. While 3D biomechanical testing is comprehensive, its application is hindered by data volume, making it challenging to derive clinically relevant conclusions. Approaches to distill motion often neglect time-series data or are dependent on population size. To address these gaps, this study introduces the Kinematic Composite Score (K-Score), a metric that distills high-dimensional motion while preserving individual variability. The objective of this research is to outline the methodology of the K-Score algorithm, highlight its strengths, limitations, and applications. We conducted a comparative study of the K-Score Algorithm against (1) the conventional isolated kinematic measures, and (2) traditional Principal Component Analysis. The analysis was conducted with a cohort of chronic low back pain (LBP) patients, who exhibit tremendous movement heterogeneity. The K-Score outperformed traditional isolated metrics in differentiating overall motion of LBP patients from healthy controls (K-Score: controls = 94.16 ± 2.64, LBP = 85.82 ± 7.73, p < 0.001). The K-Score also demonstrated significant differences in overall motion between male and female participants, where females with LBP demonstrated higher scores than males (p < 0.001). Importantly, the K-Score was not sensitive to BMI (p = 0.49), age (p = 0.14), height (p = 0.11), or sample size. In conclusion, the K-Score addresses key limitations of traditional approaches by encapsulating full-body, time-series data within a single score that is adaptable across motion capture systems and activities, making it a powerful tool for clinical biomechanics research.
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.