ArticleFrontiers in medical technology2025
Development and usability testing of a depth camera-based web application for functionally relevant foot kinematics analysis.
Article in Frontiers in medical technology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: KineFeet, a depth camera-based web tool for analyzing functional foot kinematics, was developed and tested in this study. The program was optimized for usability, affordability, and clinical relevance through an iterative design and development process. Methods: The Azure Kinect DK camera records and analyzes sagittal and frontal plane foot movements in real time. A usability-focused study was created. Five physiatrists tested the KineFeet prototype for its ability to assess foot kinematics. Performance was measured by task completion success, error rate, and time. The System Usability Scale (SUS) measured user satisfaction. Quality assessments were also obtained through semi-structured interviews. Results: Participants achieved an average success rate of 96.29%, with an error rate of 0.074% and an average completion time of 10 min 11 s. Time-Based Efficiency (TBE) showed that user performance (0.0442 tasks/s) was 1.21 times slower than expert user performance (0.05348 tasks/s). SUS yielded an average score of 66.5, indicating a good level of satisfaction and user acceptance. Conclusion: KineFeet represents a promising innovation in assessing functional foot kinematics. The system demonstrated strong usability in preliminary testing and holds potential for broader clinical adoption following further development.
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.