Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40425708›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Comparison of lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimation during athlete jumping between markerless and marker-based motion capture systems.

Changzhi Yang, Linyu Wei, Xi Huang, Lili Tu, Yanjia Xu, Xiaolong Li, Zhe Hu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Markerless motion capture to quantify disability and functional performance in spine patients: a concurrent validity study bridging laboratory biomechanics and clinical practice.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Changzhi YangShandong Sport University, Jinan, 250000, China.
Linyu WeiSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Xi HuangSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Lili TuSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China.
Yanjia XuDepartment of Physical Education, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, 54896, South Korea.
Xiaolong LiDepartment of Physical Education, Chengdu Sport University, Chengdu, 610041, China. 136897531@qq.com.
Zhe HuSchool of Physical Education, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, China. huzhe0710@swmu.edu.cn.

Funding

Hainan Provincial Key Laboratory of Sports and Health Promotion HNYJZ2023001Sichuan Sports Science Society CTXC24305Zigong City Key Research Base for Philosophy and Social Sciences YDJKY24-13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Markerless motion capture (ML) systems, which utilize deep learning algorithms, have significantly expanded the applications of biomechanical analysis. Jump tests are now essential tools for athlete monitoring and injury prevention. However, the validity of kinematic and kinetic parameters derived from ML for lower limb joints requires further validation in populations engaged in high-intensity jumping sports. The purpose of this study was to compare lower limb kinematic and kinetic estimates between marker-based (MB) and ML motion capture systems during jumps. Fourteen male Division I movement collegiate athletes performed a minimum of three squat jumps (SJ), drop jumps (DJ), and countermovement jumps (CMJ) in a fixed sequence. The movements were synchronized using ten infrared cameras, six high-resolution cameras, and two force measurement platforms, all controlled by Vicon Nexus software. Motion data were collected, and the angles, moments, and power at the hip, knee, and ankle joints were calculated using Theia3D software. These results were then compared with those obtained from the Vicon system. Comparative analyses included Pearson correlation coefficients (r), root mean square differences (RMSD), extreme error values, and statistical parametric mapping (SPM).SPM analysis of the three movements in the sagittal plane revealed significant differences in hip joint angles, with joint angle RMSD ≤ 5.6°, hip joint moments RMSD ≤ 0.26 N·M/kg, and power RMSD ≤ 2.12 W/kg showing considerable variation, though not reaching statistical significance. ML systems demonstrate high measurement accuracy in estimating knee and ankle kinematics and kinetics in the sagittal plane during these conventional jump tests; however, the accuracy of hip joint kinematic measurements in the sagittal plane requires further validation.

Indexed as

AthletesLower ExtremityAnkle JointBiomechanical PhenomenaHip JointHumansKineticsKnee JointMaleMotion CaptureMovementYoung AdultAthletic performanceBiomechanicsJumpingLower limb jointsSports injuryStatistical parametric mapping

Identifiers

PMID40425708
PMCPMC12117081

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.