MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415820073 · doi:10.3390/s25216657

Smart Total Knee Replacement: Recognition of Activities of Daily Living Using Embedded IMU Sensors and a Novel AI Model in a Cadaveric Proof-of-Concept Study

2025· article· en· W4415820073 on OpenAlexaff
Lipalo Mokete, Alexander Conway, Emma Donnelly, Ryan Willing

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersImplantcast
KeywordsCadaveric spasmInertial measurement unitActivities of daily livingTotal knee replacementKnee replacementProsthesisRehabilitationKnee Joint

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Total knee replacement (TKR) is a reliable treatment for end-stage degenerative conditions of the knee. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are central to assessing TKR outcomes, but they have limitations. Activities of daily living (ADLs) in the early post-operative period complement PROMs for holistic patient assessment. This study presents a method for capturing ADL parameters from data generated by inertial measurement unit (IMU) devices embedded in TKR prosthesis. A conventional posterior stabilized TKR was modified to create chambers in the femoral and tibial components. The prosthesis was implanted into a cadaver knee and movement was simulated using a hydraulic actuated knee simulator (AMTI, VIVO, MA, USA). A powered IMU device was placed in each of the chambers. The simulator was activated for various ADLs and the generated data was collected wirelessly. The pre-processed data was fed into a novel multimodal deep learning artificial intelligence model created to recognize specific ADL (trained on 70% of the data, with 30% reserved for validation and testing). The model achieved 95.68% overall accuracy, with 100% for sitting, standing, stance, and knee bending. Walking, stair navigation, and jogging showed F1 scores of 0.98, 0.92, 0.91, and 0.89, respectively. This technology enables seamless knee activity recognition and reporting with positive implications for patient-specific rehabilitation protocols.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensors→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→