ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
The Detection of Gait Events Based on Smartphones and Deep Learning.
Article in Bioengineering (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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to detect gait events using a smartphone combined with deep learning and evaluate the remote effects and clinical significance of this method in different elderly populations and patients with cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD). In total, 150 healthy individuals aged 20-70 years were asked to attach a smartphone to their thighs and walk six gait cycles at self-selected low, normal, and high speeds, using an insole pressure sensor as the reference standard for gait events. A deep learning model was then established using BiTCN-BiGRU-CrossAttention, and two models (TCN-GRU and BiTCN-BiGRU) were compared. In total, 48 elderly (25 healthy, 12 with mild cognitive impairment, 11 with Parkinson's disease) participated in an online home assessment, completing single-task and cognitive dual-task walking. Overall, 35 CSVD patients participated in an offline clinical assessment, completing single-task, cognitive dual-task, and physical dual-task walking. The BiTCN-BiGRU-CrossAttention model had the lowest MAE for detecting gait events compared to the other models. All models had lower MAEs for detecting heel strikes than toe-offs, and the MAE for low and high walking was higher than for normal speed walking. There were significant differences (
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.