MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377041912 · doi:10.3390/s23104802

Temporal, Kinematic and Kinetic Variables Derived from a Wearable 3D Inertial Sensor to Estimate Muscle Power during the 5 Sit to Stand Test in Older Individuals: A Validation Study

2023· article· en· W4377041912 on OpenAlexaff
Gianluca Bochicchio, Luca Ferrari, Alberto Bottari, Francesco Lucertini, Alessandra Scarton, Silvia Pogliaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersFondazione Cassa Di Risparmio Di Trento E Rovereto
KeywordsInertial measurement unitLimits of agreementBland–Altman plotPearson product-moment correlation coefficientMathematicsCorrelation coefficientStatisticsMedicineNuclear medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 5-Sit-to-stand test (5STS) is widely used to estimate lower limb muscle power (MP). An Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) could be used to obtain objective, accurate and automatic measures of lower limb MP. In 62 older adults (30 F, 66 ± 6 years) we compared (paired t-test, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, and Bland-Altman analysis) IMU-based estimates of total trial time (totT), mean concentric time (McT), velocity (McV), force (McF), and MP against laboratory equipment (Lab). While significantly different, Lab vs. IMU measures of totT (8.97 ± 2.44 vs. 8.86 ± 2.45 s, p = 0.003), McV (0.35 ± 0.09 vs. 0.27 ± 0.10 m∙s−1, p < 0.001), McF (673.13 ± 146.43 vs. 653.41 ± 144.58 N, p < 0.001) and MP (233.00 ± 70.83 vs. 174.84 ± 71.16 W, p < 0.001) had a very large to extremely large correlation (r = 0.99, r = 0.93, and r = 0.97 r = 0.76 and r = 0.79, respectively, for totT, McT, McF, McV and MP). Bland–Altman analysis showed a small, significant bias and good precision for all the variables, but McT. A sensor-based 5STS evaluation appears to be a promising objective and digitalized measure of MP. This approach could offer a practical alternative to the gold standard methods used to measure MP.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207