ArticleCommunications medicine2026
Leveraging machine learning for digital gait analysis in ataxia using sensor-free motion capture.
Article in Communications medicine, 2026. 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
backgroundGait disturbances are the clinical hallmark of ataxia. Their severity is assessed within a well-established clinical scale, which only allows coarse scoring and does not reflect the complexity of individual gait deterioration. We investigated whether sensor-free motion capture enables to replicate clinical scoring and improve the assessment of gait disturbances.
methodsThe normal walking task during clinical assessment was videotaped in 91 ataxia patients and 28 healthy controls. A full-body pose estimation model (AlphaPose) was used to extract positions, distances, and angles over time while walking. The resulting time series were analyzed with four machine learning (ML) models, which were combinations of feature extraction (tsfresh, ROCKET) and prediction methods (XGBoost, Ridge). First, in a regression and classification approach, we trained the ML models on reconstructing the clinical score. Second, we used explainable AI (SHAP) to identify the most important time series. Third, we investigated time series features to study longitudinal changes.
resultsGait disturbances are assessed with high accuracy by ML models, slightly improving human rating (i) in the categorial prediction of the clinical score (F1-score best model: 63.99%, human: 60.57% F1-score), (ii) in the detection of subtle changes (pre-symptomatic patients, clinically rated unimpaired are differentiated from HC with a F1-score of 75.96%) and (iii) in the detection of longitudinal changes over time (Pearson's correlation coefficient model: -0.626, p < 0.01; human: -0.060, not significant).
conclusionsML-based analysis shows improved sensitivity in assessing gait disturbances in ataxia. Subtle and longitudinal changes can be captured within this study. These findings suggest that such approaches may hold promise as potential outcome parameters for early interventions, therapy monitoring, and home-based assessments.
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.