MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Accessible In-Home Gait Assessment Using Spatiotemporal Neural Networks with Visual and Kinematic Data

2025· article· en· W4416961674 on OpenAlexaff
Sean K.T. Gaiesky, Christopher Napier, Edward J. Park

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkWearable computerGaitKinematicsMotion (physics)Motion captureSTRIDELimiting

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait analysis traditionally relied on controlled laboratory settings, limiting its practical use in non-clinical environments. This study proposes an accessible framework utilizing consumer electronics, combining data from an Apple Watch and a visual sensor system, to measure stride time (ST) across three walking speeds: slow, normal, and fast. Data was collected from eight participants in a semi-controlled setting designed to match real-world conditions. The machine learning framework, combining Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory (BiLSTM) networks, was utilized to analyze the multimodal sensor data and calculate ST. The system demonstrated strong agreement with an infrared marker-based optical motion capture system particularly at slower walking speeds. These findings underscore the feasibility of combining consumer-grade wearable and ambient sensors for accurate, accessible gait analysis in nonclinical settings.Clinical Relevance-This framework offers a cost-effective solution for gait analysis, reducing reliance on expensive clinical equipment. By utilizing consumer electronics, it provides a user-friendly and accessible alternative for individuals with mobility impairments, enabling regular assessments in non-clinical settings.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→