ArticleCureus2025
Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a Markerless Motion Capture System for Sagittal-Plane Gait Range of Motion.
Article in Cureus, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOptical three-dimensional (3D) motion capture systems and inertial measurement unit (IMU)-based systems provide accurate kinematic measurements, yet both remain costly and require complex setups. Artificial intelligence (AI)-driven markerless systems that operate with a single smartphone offer a practical alternative. In this study, we evaluated the validity and reliability of a markerless motion capture system (SPLYZA Motion; SPLYZA Inc., Shizuoka, METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Twenty healthy adults walked at a self-selected pace, and hip, knee, and ankle joint angles were recorded simultaneously using both systems. Joint angles were time-normalized, and waveform characteristics and peak values were compared. Associations were assessed using Spearman's rank correlation (ρ), agreement was examined using intraclass correlation [ICC(3,1)] with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and proportional and fixed bias were evaluated using linear regression and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Agreement was further assessed using Bland-Altman analysis.
resultsSignificant positive correlations were observed for the hip (ρ = 0.913, p < 0.01), knee (ρ = 0.833, p < 0.01), and ankle (ρ = 0.721, p < 0.01). ICCs demonstrated excellent agreement for the hip (0.914; 95% CI: 0.906-0.920) and knee (0.934; 95% CI: 0.929-0.940) and good agreement for the ankle (0.723; 95% CI: 0.701-0.743). Root-mean-square error (RMSE) values (mean ± SD) were 7.73 ± 3.32° (hip), 7.48 ± 3.40° (knee), and 6.38 ± 2.44° (ankle). Bland-Altman plots indicated small biases for the hip and knee, with wider limits for the ankle near end-range positions.
conclusionSPLYZA Motion showed accuracy and reliability comparable to Ultium Motion within clinically acceptable limits. Minor ankle-related biases were small enough to avoid affecting clinical interpretation. Given its low cost and portability, this system provides a practical option for gait assessment in routine clinical and research environments. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Minimal setup AI-based markerless motion capture enables a feasible clinical gait analysis.
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.