ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2026
IMU-based gait analysis methods: a systematic review of techniques for different body locations.
Review 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gait analysis is a crucial tool for evaluating human motor function, with its applications expanding across clinical and health-monitoring domains. The growth of the aging global population and an increasing emphasis on sports health have positioned gait abnormalities as significant biomarkers for assessing fall risk and neurological disorders, including Parkinson's disease. Compared with conventional optical systems, inertial measurement units (IMUs) provide a high-precision, cost-effective, and portable alternative, thereby facilitating the practical capture of gait data in real-world contexts. Objective: This review aims to deliver a comprehensive guide for selecting the most suitable IMU-based gait analysis methodologies, tailored to various application scenarios. Unlike existing reviews, which primarily focus on specific algorithms or populations, this study uniquely synthesizes current IMU-based methods from a sensor-placement perspective. Furthermore, we propose a practical decision framework to guide researchers and clinicians in selecting the optimal sensor locations and algorithms tailored to specific application scenarios and computational constraints. Method: A systematic search was conducted across the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, PubMed, and Web of Science databases from January 2019 to December 2025 using relevant English and Chinese keywords related to IMUs and gait analysis. To ensure methodological completeness in this mature field, foundational studies published before 2019 were additionally included through targeted supplementary retrieval. The retrieved studies underwent a systematic review. Results and conclusions: This paper provides a comprehensive comparison of IMU-based gait analysis methods across various sensor placements on the body (e.g., foot, leg, chest). The findings reveal substantial differences in algorithm complexity, accuracy, and suitability across distinct populations and scenarios. This study establishes an evidence-based framework for identifying optimal gait analysis solutions to address diverse application needs.
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.