ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Validation of Insole Pressure Sensor Algorithms: Implications for In-Field Detection of Initial Contact and Hamstring Muscle Pre-Activity During Side-Cutting.
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
Accurate detection of initial contact (IC) during side-cutting is essential for evaluating m. semitendinosus (ST) pre-activity, a protective mechanism against ACL injury in team sport athletes. This study developed two insole pressure sensor (IPS) algorithms-a body weight-based and a criteria-based algorithm-for IC detection and evaluated their agreement with force-plate-derived IC based on vertical ground reaction forces (vGRF). Twenty-six adult female athletes performed sport-specific side-cutting while IPS, vGRF, and ST electromyography were recorded. IPS-derived IC events were compared with vGRF-derived IC, and ST pre-activity within 50 ms prior to IC was compared between methods. Agreement and limits of agreement (LoA) were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. The body weight-based IPS algorithm showed a systematic delay in IC detection of 9.2 ms (LoA: 4.1 to 14.3 ms) and a -3.5 percentage point bias in ST pre-activity (LoA: -8.9 to 1.9% of MVC). In contrast, the criteria-based IPS algorithm, demonstrated minimal bias in IC detection (-0.1 ms; LoA: -3.5 to 3.4 ms) and ST pre-activity (-0.1% MVC; LoA: -1.9 to 1.7% of MVC). These findings suggest the criteria-based IPS algorithm enables accurate IC detection, supporting its potential for practical monitoring of ST pre-activity during sports-specific side-cutting outside laboratory 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.