ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Geometry-informed correction of projection bias in browser-based monocular squat assessment.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Monocular RGB-based human pose estimation is increasingly applied in field-based movement assessments; however, systematic projection-related errors inherent to the simplified camera geometry remain insufficiently characterized relative to laboratory-based biomechanical standards. This study quantified systematic projection bias in a browser-based markerless motion capture (MMC) system and validated a geometry-informed linear correction framework for sagittal-plane squat analysis under standardized monocular acquisition conditions. Methods: Bodyweight squats performed by 30 healthy adult males were simultaneously recorded using a three-dimensional marker-based optical motion capture (OMC) system and a two-dimensional webcam positioned at a fixed distance and orientation. Results: Raw joint angles obtained from the MMC system revealed significant systematic underestimation (hip: -11.2°, knee: -10.6°), consistent with perspective-induced projection effects predicted by the pinhole camera model and differences in the joint center definitions. To address this projection-consistent bias, a geometry-constrained linear correction model was developed and validated using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. The correction effectively neutralized the systematic bias (hip: 0°, Discussion: Importantly, high accuracy was achieved without incorporating participant-specific anthropometric variables, suggesting that projection-consistent geometric factors predominated under controlled camera conditions. These findings demonstrate that systematic errors in monocular pose estimation can be substantially mitigated when the acquisition distance and orientation are standardized. Our results suggest that under such predefined recording constraints, corrected joint angles provide practically relevant estimates for strength assessment and rehabilitation monitoring.
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.