ArticlePloS one2026
Evaluating markerless biomechanical analysis in a real-world pole vault competition setting.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Comparison of shoulder kinetics between running overhead throws with circular and whip-like wind up in elite handball players.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluated a purpose-trained markerless motion capture system for biomechanical analysis in elite pole vault competition. The aim was to determine whether a markerless approach could produce results comparable to manual digitising-the current standard in live competition settings-when operating under the practical constraint of a fixed four-camera setup. Data were collected from eight world-class pole vaulters during the 2024 World Athletics Indoor Championships. The final steps of the run-up through take-off were recorded at 100 Hz and analysed using both manual digitisation and the SIMI Nemo Markerless system to extract key biomechanical variables. Results showed strong overall agreement between methods for most spatial and centre of mass (CM) variables, with mean relative bias and random error of 0.3% and 3.8%, respectively. Step length differed by approximately 1 cm, and running step velocities showed root mean square error (RMSE) values between 0.02 and 0.05 m/s. CM height and horizontal velocity at pole plant showed RMSEs below 0.02 m and 0.1 m/s, respectively. At take-off, horizontal, vertical and absolute CM velocities all showed RMSE values of approximately 0.1 m/s. For these variables, intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.898-1.000. Continuous waveform agreement was also strong, with Coefficient of Multiple Determination values exceeding 0.98 for vertical CM displacement, and above 0.90 for both CM velocity and most joint angle trajectories. In contrast, joint angles at take-off showed less agreement (RMSE 5°-10°), reflecting challenges in joint landmark identification in field conditions, and indicating that further refinement may be needed for complex movements. These findings suggest that, when supported by anatomically-informed pose estimation algorithms, a four-camera markerless setup is capable of capturing essential performance indicators in elite pole vault. The approach shows strong potential for scientific and applied use in real-world sport environments.
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.