ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Assessment of reliability and concurrent validity of a single trunk-based IMU system to quantify spatiotemporal parameters in healthy individuals.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCommercially available Inertial Measurement Units (IMU) are gaining popularity in clinical gait analysis. Compared to standard optoelectronic motion capture systems (OMCs), IMUs offer advantages such as lower cost, greater time efficiency, and the ability to be used outside of laboratory settings. IMUs can be attached to various body parts and have already been tested in numerous clinical studies. This study aimed to assess the intra-session reliability and concurrent validity of a trunk-based IMU system (BTS G-Walk®) in healthy individuals compared to an OMC system (VICON®).
methodsTo test the intra-session reliability and concurrent validity of the BTS-G-Walk®, 27 healthy participants were recruited for gait analysis. Both the IMU and OMC systems were used simultaneously to record spatiotemporal gait parameters under a standardized laboratory protocol. Eight spatiotemporal parameters were analyzed, using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC 2,k) and Bland–Altman analysis to evaluate the reliability and concurrent validity.
resultsThe IMU demonstrated excellent intra-session reliability across all parameters (ICC: 0.952–0.995). Concurrent validity was good to excellent for cadence, speed, stride length, and stride duration (ICC: 0.807–0.999), but poor for stance phase, single support, double support, and swing phase (ICC: 0.036–0.136). Bland–Altman analysis showed the lowest mean percentage bias for cadence (− 0.18%) and the highest for double support phase (23.45%).
conclusionThe BTS-G-Walk® delivers reliable values in healthy individuals. Regarding concurrent validity, stride duration and cadence demonstrated the highest agreement with the reference system. Caution is advised when using the IMU in clinical practice, particularly for interpreting parameters dependent on toe-off events, such as gait phase durations.
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.