Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41673441›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Comparison of 3D ankle kinematics between minimal inertial measurement units configuration and optical motion capture system under diverse walking conditions.

Jongsu Kim, Lingchao Xie, Sanghyun Cho

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Jongsu KimDepartment of Physical Therapy, Yonsei University, Wonju, 26493, South Korea. asdqwe1832@yonsei.ac.kr.
Lingchao XieDepartment of Neurosurgery, Taizhou University, Taizhou, 317500, People's Republic of China.
Sanghyun ChoDepartment of Physical Therapy, Yonsei University, Wonju, 26493, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate assessment of three-dimensional ankle kinematics is essential for advancing biomechanical analyses and informing potential clinical applications. While optical motion capture systems (OMCs) are considered the gold standard, their high cost and limited portability restrict their use outside the laboratory. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) offer a more practical alternative; however, concerns remain regarding their validity and reliability in diverse walking conditions. This study evaluated the agreement and repeatability of IMU-derived ankle kinematics relative to OMCs across three walking surfaces: level ground, inward wedge, and outward wedge. Ankle movements in the sagittal, frontal, and transverse planes were analyzed using a minimal sensor configuration. Moderate to high agreement and consistent repeatability were observed in the sagittal and transverse planes, particularly during level and inward wedge floor walking. Conversely, the frontal plane demonstrated limited agreement under wedged conditions, likely because of complex multisegmental foot dynamics and reference frame misalignment from static calibration. Despite these limitations, consistent repeatability across conditions supports the use of IMUs for tracking ankle kinematics outside the laboratory. These findings suggest the preliminary applicability of IMUs as a functional tool for interpreting ankle kinematics outside the laboratory.

Indexed as

AnkleAnkle JointWalkingAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleGaitHumansMaleMotion CaptureRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsYoung AdultAnkle kinematicsDiverse walking conditionsGait analysisInertial measurement unitsOptical motion capture systemValidity and repeatability

Identifiers

PMID41673441
PMCPMC12966368

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.