ArticleScientific reports2026
AI-assisted video analysis of the Trendelenburg test: a feasibility study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Validations and applications of markerless motion capture using OpenCap: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Trendelenburg test is widely used to assess hip abductor function, but interpretation is typically subjective and only moderately reliable. Compensatory trunk lean can mask subtle pelvic drop, further limiting diagnostic accuracy. Artificial intelligence (AI) based markerless motion analysis allows objective quantification of pelvic, trunk, and knee angles using standard video recordings. This single-centre cross-sectional feasibility study was conducted in an Irish orthopaedic unit. Twelve adults were enrolled: seven post-total hip arthroplasty (THA) and five with native hip pathology. Each patient performed a standardised single-leg Trendelenburg test on both legs while being recorded with a single posteriorly placed smartphone camera. Videos were analysed offline using an AI-based markerless motion application (OnForm) to derive coronal-plane pelvic obliquity, trunk lean, and knee angle change between bipedal and single-leg stance. Continuous outcomes were summarised as medians with interquartile ranges (IQR) and ranges. Pre-specified thresholds (pelvic drop ≥ 4°, trunk lean ≥ 5°, knee angle change ≥ 3°) were used to describe the frequency of marked deviations. All patients completed the protocol with analysable recordings. The median video capture time was 32.5 s (IQR 23.5-36.0; range 19-42) and the median analysis time was 184.5 s (IQR 178.5-196.5; range 168-207), giving a median total workflow time of 215.5 s (IQR 203.5-232.5; range 193-244) per patient. Median worst contralateral pelvic obliquity was 0.0° (IQR - 1.0° to + 1.5°; range - 5° to + 6°). Median maximum trunk lean was 4.5° (IQR 2.8°-9.0°; range 2°-10°). Median coronal-plane knee angle change was 3.0° (IQR 2.0°-4.0°; range 1°-8°). Post-THA patients showed greater trunk compensation than those with native hips (median maximal trunk lean 9.0° vs 3.0°; median difference 6.0°), with trunk lean ≥ 5° in 5/7 post-THA and 1/5 native-hip patients. Knee deviations ≥ 3° were seen in 8 patients (67%). AI-assisted single-camera analysis of the Trendelenburg test is feasible, rapid, and clinically informative. The method consistently quantified pelvic, trunk, and knee angles and demonstrated that post-THA patients frequently compensate with trunk lean rather than contralateral pelvic drop. This approach could enhance objective documentation of Trendelenburg performance and support postoperative rehabilitation monitoring. These findings are preliminary and hypothesis-generating; larger controlled studies with asymptomatic controls and reference standards are required to validate accuracy and clinical utility.
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.