Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41157527›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Effect of Walking Speed on the Reliability of a Smartphone-Based Markerless Gait Analysis System.

Edilson Fernando de Borba, Jorge L Storniolo, Serena Cerfoglio, Paolo Capodaglio, Veronica Cimolin, Leonardo A Peyré-Tartaruga, Marcus P Tartaruga, Paolo Cavallari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Edilson Fernando de BorbaPhysical Education Department, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba 81530-000, PR, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9399-1098
Jorge L StornioloLaboratorio Sperimentale di Fisiopatologia Neuromotoria, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 20821 Meda, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6182-8560
Serena CerfoglioDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1983-8204
Paolo CapodaglioResearch Laboratory in Biomechanics, Rehabilitation and Ergonomics, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 28824 Piancavallo, Verbania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3719-8789
Veronica CimolinDepartment of Electronics, Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6299-7254
Leonardo A Peyré-TartarugaHuman Locomotion Laboratory (LOCOLAB), Department of Public Health, Experimental and Forensic Medicine, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy.
Marcus P TartarugaPhysical Education Department, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba 81530-000, PR, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1173-2816
Paolo CavallariLaboratorio Sperimentale di Fisiopatologia Neuromotoria, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, 20821 Meda, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3160-9030

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative gait analysis is essential for understanding motor function and guiding clinical decisions. While marker-based motion capture (MoCap) systems are accurate, they are costly and require specialized facilities. OpenCap, a markerless alternative, offers a more accessible approach; however, its reliability across different walking speeds remains uncertain. This study assessed the agreement between OpenCap and MoCap in measuring spatiotemporal parameters, joint kinematics, and center of mass (CoM) displacement during level walking at three speeds: slow, self-selected, and fast. Fifteen healthy adults performed multiple trials simultaneously, recorded by both systems. Agreement was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), minimal detectable change (MDC), Bland-Altman analyses, root mean square error (RMSE), Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM), and repeated-measures ANOVA. Results indicated excellent agreement for spatiotemporal variables (ICC ≥ 0.95) and high consistency for joint waveforms (RMSE < 2°) and CoM displacement (RMSE < 6 mm) across all speeds. However, the joint range of motion (ROM) showed lower reliability, especially at the hip and ankle, at higher speeds. ANOVA revealed no significant System × Speed interactions for most variables, though a significant effect of speed was noted, with OpenCap underestimating walking speed more at fast speeds. Overall, OpenCap is a valuable tool for gait assessment, very accurate for spatiotemporal data and CoM displacement. Still, caution should be taken when interpreting joint kinematics and speed at different walking speeds.

Indexed as

GaitGait AnalysisSmartphoneWalkingWalking SpeedAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansMaleRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultbiomechanicsgait analysisMoCapOpenCapwalking

Identifiers

PMID41157527
PMCPMC12568194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.