ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Estimation of the Knee Joint with Single-Camera Smartphone.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Gait analysis provides quantitative information on walking patterns and has proven invaluable for assessing motor function in rehabilitation programmes. A markerless motion capture system combining computer vision techniques provides low-cost, real-time, portable gait analysis. (2) Methods: The kinematics of the knee and ankle of twenty-seven healthy volunteers were assessed using a single smartphone camera combined with the MediaPipe human pose estimation framework. The system was validated using the OPAL wearable sensor system by APDM Wearable Technologies. (3) Results: Findings showed close correspondence between the two systems for knee kinematics showing a mean absolute error of 4.10° ± 2.32° and 3.15° ± 3.10° for right and left knee flexion, respectively, and a mean absolute error of 2.30° ± 2.01° and 3.12° ± 2.63° for right and left knee extension, respectively. The mean absolute error for right and left knee range of motion was found to be 4.55° ± 3.12° and 4.15° ± 3.01°, respectively. Moreover, Bland-Altman plots indicated minimal bias (average 0.6 for flexion, average 0.47 for the extension, and 0.30 for the range of motion) and excellent correlation for knee flexion bilaterally (0.916 and 0.845 for the right and left side, respectively), with slightly lower but still satisfactory agreement for knee extension (0.862 and 0.845 for the right and left side, respectively). Conversely, ankle measurements revealed poor concordance: dorsiflexion and range of motion presented significant differences and systematic errors, while plantarflexion showed no statistical difference but weak correlation. (4) Conclusions: This study demonstrated that combining a smartphone camera with a human pose estimation framework allows for low-cost, real-time, portable gait analysis, particularly of the knee joint.
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.