Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42145954›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2026

Comparison of peak joint angles from non-concurrent squat and upper-limb assessment using a markerless Kinotek system and a marker-based Vicon system.

Ofra A Pottorf, Eric T Greenberg, Micha C Garcia, Birendra M Dewan

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ofra A PottorfDepartment of Allied Health and Kinesiology, Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1298-5498
Eric T GreenbergDepartment of Physical Therapy, New York Institute of Technology, Old Westbury, New York, United States.
Micha C GarciaSchool of Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6892-1944
Birendra M DewanDepartment of Physical Therapy, Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Three-dimensional motion capture systems are essential for assessing human movement patterns, optimizing performance, and monitoring recovery. Marker-based systems are considered the gold standard but are often impractical in clinical settings due to their complexity. Markerless systems, such as Kinotek, offer a portable and user-friendly alternative. This study compared peak joint angles measured from non-concurrent trials using the Kinotek markerless system with a single-camera setup and the Vicon marker-based system. Methods: Twenty-one healthy adults performed shoulder flexion, shoulder abduction, squat, and trunk rotation movements. Movements were captured using the Kinotek markerless system and a Vicon marker-based system in separate trials in randomized immediate succession. Paired t-tests or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared differences in peak joint angles between the two systems, while Pearson's (r) or Kendall's Tau-b (τb) correlation coefficients assessed the relationship between systems. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC(A,5)) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) evaluated within-system repeatability across five repetitions. Results: No significant differences between marker-based and markerless systems were observed for hip and shoulder flexion. Significant differences between systems were found for knee flexion, ankle dorsiflexion, trunk rotation, and shoulder abduction. Moderate correlations were found for left knee flexion (τb = 0.62) and left shoulder abduction (r = 0.58), fair correlations were found for right knee flexion (τb = 0.42), and weak or negligible correlations were found for the other assessed movements. Kinotek demonstrated lower repeatability (ICC range = -0.013-0.908) than the Vicon system (ICC range = 0.324-0.996), with good repeatability for Kinotek in ankle dorsiflexion and shoulder abduction. Conclusions: The Kinotek system demonstrated limited agreement with the Vicon system for peak joint angle measurements, with moderate or fair correlations observed in 3 of the 12 investigated variables. Significant differences between systems were identified, suggesting that the two systems should not be used interchangeably for all kinematic assessments, and highlights the need for further optimization of portable single-camera markerless technology. While the Kinotek system offers practical advantages for movement evaluation in clinical and field-based environments where traditional marker-based may be impractical, further methodological refinement and validation against gold-standard reference methods are needed before broader application in biomechanical analysis. This study adds to the growing literature on markerless motion capture by identifying areas of limited reliability alongside its practical advantages, supporting its continued development as a more accessible approach to movement analysis.

Indexed as

Range of Motion, ArticularShoulder JointUpper ExtremityAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHip JointHumansMaleMotion CaptureMovementReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adult3-DBiomechanicsKinematic analysisKinotekMarkerless motion captureVicon

Identifiers

PMID42145954
PMCPMC13179743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.