ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
A Reliability Study of Small, Portable, Easy-to-Use, and IMU-Based Sensors for Gait Assessment.
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Viewpoint: Next-Generation Sensor Technologies for Studying Mental Health.IEEE sensors letters · 2026Article
- Dynamic Feature Elimination-Based Visual-Inertial Navigation Algorithm.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The standard motion analysis systems are limited to laboratory settings; therefore, an individual's gait may not be realistic, as it is removed from the day-to-day environment in which people ambulate. The modern world and advanced technologies have driven portable, affordable, and wearable sensors for real-world gait assessment that can be used outside the laboratory and during day-to-day activities. Wearable sensors offer a promising solution; however, despite that, the reliability of many wearable systems, especially under unsupervised and real-world-like conditions, remains insufficiently validated. This study aimed to establish intra- and inter-rater reliability of the inertial sensors as a tool used in gait analysis in a quasi-real-world environment. Ninety-eight healthy participants (52% females) aged 19-33 years took part in this reliability study. The research procedures included two separate measurements of gait analysis at participants' preferred walking speed, conducted by two raters assessing selected spatiotemporal parameters. The reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and the bias was assessed using the Bland-Altman method. The analysis of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) revealed excellent, or near-excellent, reliability for walking speed, cadence, and stride length between raters (ICC = 0.932-0.941, 0.950-0.957, and 0.916-0.938, respectively) and between measurements (ICC = 0.916-0.928, 0.934-0.938, and 0.888-0.906, respectively). Bland-Altman plots confirmed minimal systematic bias for both inter- and intra-rater assessments, with differences in walking speed below 0.038 km/h, cadence below 0.283 steps/min, and stride length below 0.827 cm. The examined sensors are reliable tools for walking speed, cadence, and stride length in a quasi-real-world environment gait assessment. Future studies should include gait analysis involving random path and direction changes, turns, uneven or slippery surfaces, and natural environments. Additionally, research should consider individuals ambulating with various walking aids, or those with unilateral disorders, such as stroke.
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.