ArticleScientific reports2026
Human pose recognition and automated scoring detection for sports rehabilitation.
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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the development of sports rehabilitation, accurate assessment of the patient's rehabilitation process has become the key to enhance the rehabilitation effect. To solve the problems of inaccurate recognition and poor real-time performance of the rehabilitation human pose recognition model for traditional sports in complex environments, this study proposes an integrated framework for efficient and accurate human pose recognition and automated scoring in sports rehabilitation. The study constructs a human pose recognition model using a human pose tracking algorithm and achieves pose classification by extracting key points of the human skeleton and combining them with a random forest algorithm. Meanwhile, a siamese neural network and similarity metric algorithm are introduced to optimize the automated score detection model, accurately assessing the quality of rehabilitation movements. The outcomes indicated that the automatic scoring detection system achieved 98% accuracy in human body pose recognition. In terms of joint angle error, the error rate of the detection model designed in the study was below 6%, which was significantly better than the comparison method. In rehabilitation score correlation test, the correlation of the model was maintained at 92-98%, demonstrating higher scoring accuracy. The outcomes reveal that the model designed in the study has high recognition accuracy and evaluation stability. This makes it an efficient and accurate assessment tool for rehabilitation therapy. It can also effectively improve the effectiveness of rehabilitation training and the quality of life of patients.
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.