ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Leakage-Resistant Evaluation of Gait Mat and Multisensor Biomechanical Features for Knee Osteoarthritis Screening: A Subject-Level Data Integrity Study.
Article in Bioengineering (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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selecting a sensing architecture for knee osteoarthritis (OA) screening requires balancing biomechanical information, system complexity, and reproducibility. We audited a public Korean multimodal gait dataset and performed a leakage-resistant internal evaluation. The release contained 180 participants (90 normal, 90 knee OA) measured using a smart insole, instrumented gait mat, and inertial measurement units (IMUs); all 1080 JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) files were checked for structural, value, provenance, and duplication errors. The primary benchmark was a fixed class-balanced L2 logistic regression model using nine gait mat variables, evaluated with subject-level repeated stratified five-fold cross-validation and 10,000 outcome-stratified bootstrap resamples. The audit identified 14 source-path metadata errors and one opposing-label duplicate smart insole payload, but no parsing, schema, range, or cross-partition subject errors. The gait mat model achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.924 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.879-0.962), balanced accuracy 0.883 (0.833-0.928), sensitivity 0.856, specificity 0.911, and Brier score 0.102. Adding smart insole and/or IMU features did not improve AUROC. Provider-model reproduction was descriptive because the public Validation partition informed model selection. In this release, the compact gait mat feature set provided the most favorable observed balance of discrimination, interpretability, and sensing complexity; external prospective evaluation is required before clinical use.
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.