ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Validation of Novel Stride Length Model-Based Approaches to Estimate Distance Covered Based on Acceleration and Pressure Data During Walking.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability to walk is essential in daily life, making walking outcomes key measures in clinical practice. This study aims to develop and validate two novel stride length model-based approaches for total distance estimation using a smart insole. Eight participants wore a pair of smart insoles. For a period of six minutes, each participant walked back and forth on a predefined 20 m pathway, and the numbers of round trips and strides taken were counted. Two stride length estimation approaches based on the director coefficients of acceleration data (Approach 1) and dynamic time warping (Approach 2) using smart insoles were used. The median accuracies of the total distance using Approach 1 are 98.92% [1.24%] (ICC = 0.992) and 98.69% [2.44%] (ICC = 0.994) for the right and left sides, respectively. For Approach 2, the average accuracies are 98.95% [0.18%] (ICC = 0.996) for the right side and 99.03% [0.14%] (ICC = 0.991) for the left side. The Mann-Whitney U test shows no statistically significant difference between the actual distance and smart insole for the total distance covered. Furthermore, there is no statistically significant difference between Approach 1 and Approach 2 for stride length. Although the sample size was small, the estimated total distance using the novel model-based algorithms appears to be accurate in comparison to the actual total distance.
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.