ArticleEuropean journal of sport science2026
Making Sense of Shoulder Exercise: Measuring the Accuracy of an Artificial Intelligence Model to Classify Shoulder Exercise via Wearable Sensors Among People With and Without Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy.
Article in European journal of sport science, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the accuracy of machine learning classification for three commonly prescribed shoulder exercises in people with and without rotator cuff tendinopathy. Eighteen participants with rotator cuff tendinopathy (mean age 54.2, SD 13.2; 50% female), followed by eighteen matched controls completed a laboratory-based shoulder strength testing protocol. Three exercises were performed (shoulder press, lateral raise and bent over row) while wearing three inertial measurement (IMU) sensors (Axivity, Ax6 - 3 axis accelerometry and gyroscope at 100 Hz and 1000°/sec respectively) positioned on the wrist arm and trunk. Data were analysed and accuracy was compared between common machine learning algorithms for those with rotator cuff tendinopathy and healthy matched controls in a subject-dependent and subject-independent model. The best accuracy scores for the subject-dependent results were achieved by a random forest algorithm; 96.12% (3-sensor combined system) for those with rotator cuff tendinopathy. For the subject-independent results best accuracy scores were achieved by a convolutional neural network algorithm; 94.55% (3-sensors) for the healthy controls without shoulder pain. K-fold cross validation confusion matrix results by exercise type for the entire cohort show 97% accuracy (shoulder press), 95.5% (lateral raise) and 90.7% (bent over row) (3-sensors, CNN subject-independent analysis). Machine learning classification of 3 different shoulder exercises in people with rotator cuff tendinopathy and matched healthy controls demonstrate most accurate results using a CNN algorithm for subject-independent analysis and a RF algorithm for subject-dependent analysis. Results were similar for both those with rotator cuff tendinopathy and their matched healthy controls.
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.