The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis
Open accessAbstract
The potential of inertial measurement units (IMUs) for ergonomics applications appears promising. However, previous IMUs validation studies have been incomplete regarding aspects of joints analysed, complexity of movements and duration of trials. The objective was to determine the technological error and biomechanical model differences between IMUs and an optoelectronic system and evaluate the effect of task complexity and duration. Whole-body kinematics from 12 participants was recorded simultaneously with a full-body Xsens system where an Optotrak cluster was fixed on every IMU. Short functional movements and long manual material handling tasks were performed and joint angles were compared between the two systems. The differences attributed to the biomechanical model showed significantly greater (P ≤ .001) RMSE than the technological error. RMSE was systematically higher (P ≤ .001) for the long complex task with a mean on all joints of 2.8° compared to 1.2° during short functional movements. Definition of local coordinate systems based on anatomical landmarks or single posture was the most influent difference between the two systems. Additionally, IMUs accuracy was affected by the complexity and duration of the tasks. Nevertheless, technological error remained under 5° RMSE during handling tasks, which shows potential to track workers during their daily labour.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“RMSE results varied between less than 1° and 9°, showing good joint measurement validity [33,34,37,40,41].”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“RMSE and correlation coefficients varied respectively from 0.2 to 9.3° and 0.53 to 1.00, showing fair to excellent validity [5,30,37,41,42,46,53,54,55,56,57,58,59].”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“Validity was similar across all movement planes and axes [34,36,37,38,41,46,47,48,49,50,51].”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“RMSE and correlation coefficients varied respectively from 0.4 to 18.8° and 0.33 to 0.99 [29,37,41,43,53,54,55,57,59,62,63].”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“RMSE and coefficient correlation varied respectively from 1 to 11.5° and 0.4 to 1.00 [5,30,37,41,43,48,50,53,54,55,57,58,59,60,61].”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“Also, as demonstrated by Robert-Lachaine et al. [37], the choice of the biomechanical model used to convert M/IMU orientation data into anatomically meaningful information will also influence validity differently depending on the joint studied.”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“According to Robert-Lachaine et al., shoulder rotation is also more influenced by the biomechanical model than shoulder flexion–extension or abduction/adduction.”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
In the citing paper
“Their results showed that biomechanical models used for the upper limbs are more likely to add variability, leading to larger RMSE.”
From Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
Citations
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965
Beckett, A. H., Rowland, M., & TURNER, P. (1965) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(65)91037-8 · Cited by 16,917
Wu, G., van der Helm, F. C. T., Veeger, H. E. J., Makhsous, M., Roy, P. V., Anglin, C., Nagels, J., Karduna, A. R., McQuade, K. J., Wang, X., et al. (2004) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.05.042 · Cited by 4,569
Wu, G., Siegler, S., Allard, P., Kirtley, C., Leardini, A., Rosenbaum, D., Whittle, M., DʼLima, D. D., Cristofolini, L., Witte, H., et al. (2002) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00222-6 · Cited by 3,249
Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry
Leardini, A., Chiari, L., Croce, U. D., & Cappozzo, A. (2005) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2004.05.002 · Cited by 1,239
(2009) · Cited by 701
(1998) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.35-6297 · Cited by 430
New least squares solutions for estimating the average centre of rotation and the axis of rotation
Gamage, S. S. H. U., & Lasenby, J. (2002) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/s0021-9290(01)00160-9 · Cited by 378
The use of inertial sensors system for human motion analysis
Cuesta-Vargas, A. I., Galán-Mercant, A., & Williams, J. M. (2010) · Physical Therapy Reviews · doi:10.1179/1743288x11y.0000000006 · Cited by 369
Harrington, M., Zavatsky, A. B., LAWSON, S. E. M., Yuan, Z., & Theologis, T. N. (2006) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.02.003 · Cited by 367
Ambulatory measurement of arm orientation
Luinge, H. J., Veltink, P. H., & Baten, C. T. M. (2006) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.11.011 · Cited by 356
Knutzen, K. M. (1998) · American Journal of Human Biology · doi:10.1002/(sici)1520-6300(1998)10:6 · Cited by 339
Innovative system for real-time ergonomic feedback in industrial manufacturing
Vignais, N., Miezal, M., Bleser, G., Mura, K., Gorecky, D., & Marin, F. (2012) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2012.11.008 · Cited by 335
Concurrent validation of Xsens MVN measurement of lower limb joint angular kinematics
Zhang, J.-T., Novak, A. C., Brouwer, B., & Li, Q. (2013) · Physiological Measurement · doi:10.1088/0967-3334/34/8/n63 · Cited by 314
Ambulatory measurement of shoulder and elbow kinematics through inertial and magnetic sensors
Cutti, A. G., Giovanardi, A., Rocchi, L., Davalli, A., & Sacchetti, R. (2008) · Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing · doi:10.1007/s11517-007-0296-5 · Cited by 311
Magnetic distortion in motion labs, implications for validating inertial magnetic sensors
Vries, W. H. K. D., Veeger, H. E. J., Baten, C. T. M., & van der Helm, F. C. T. (2009) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.12.004 · Cited by 292
Joint kinematics estimate using wearable inertial and magnetic sensing modules
Picerno, P., Cereatti, A., & Cappozzo, A. (2008) · Gait & Posture · doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.04.003 · Cited by 279
Shoulder and Elbow Joint Angle Tracking With Inertial Sensors
El‐Gohary, M., & McNames, J. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2012.2208750 · Cited by 264
‘Outwalk’: a protocol for clinical gait analysis based on inertial and magnetic sensors
Cutti, A. G., Ferrari, A., Garofalo, P., Raggi, M., Cappello, A., & Ferrari, A. (2009) · Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing · doi:10.1007/s11517-009-0545-x · Cited by 218
Palermo, E., Rossi, S., Marini, F., Patanè, F., & Cappa, P. (2014) · Measurement · doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2014.03.004 · Cited by 183
Ferrari, A., Cutti, A. G., Garofalo, P., Raggi, M., Heijboer, M., Cappello, A., & Davalli, A. (2009) · Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing · doi:10.1007/s11517-009-0544-y · Cited by 181
Methods for Measuring and Representing Automobile Occupant Posture
Reed, M. P., Manary, M. A., & Schneider, L. W. (1999) · SAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · doi:10.4271/1999-01-0959 · Cited by 178
Kim, S., & Nussbaum, M. A. (2012) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2012.742932 · Cited by 151
Estimation of the hip joint centre in human motion analysis: A systematic review
Kainz, H., Carty, C. P., Modenese, L., Boyd, R. N., & Lloyd, D. G. (2015) · Clinical Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.02.005 · Cited by 135
Bouvier, B., Duprey, S., Claudon, L., Dumas, R., & Savescu, A. (2015) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s150818813 · Cited by 133
Biomechanics of the Wrist Joint
(1991) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3208-7 · Cited by 129
Accuracy of inertial motion sensors in static, quasistatic, and complex dynamic motion
Godwin, A., Agnew, M., & Stevenson, J. (2009) · Journal of Biomechanical Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.4000109 · Cited by 107
Inertial measurements of upper limb motion
Zhou, H., Hu, H., & Tao, Y. (2006) · Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing · doi:10.1007/s11517-006-0063-z · Cited by 106
Evaluation of a hybrid system for three-dimensional measurement of trunk posture in motion
Plamondon, A., Delisle, A., Larue, C., Brouillette, D., McFadden, D., Desjardins, P., & Larivière, C. (2007) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2006.12.006 · Cited by 102
Self-citationSchall, M. C., Fethke, N. B., Chen, H., Oyama, S., & Douphrate, D. I. (2016) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2015.1079335 · Cited by 96
Dynamic accuracy of inertial measurement units during simple pendulum motion
Brodie, M. A. D., Walmsley, A., & Page, W. (2008) · Computer Methods in Biomechanics & Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1080/10255840802125526 · Cited by 77
Fantozzi, S., Giovanardi, A., Magalhães, F. A., Di Michele, R., Cortesi, M., & Gatta, G. (2016) · Journal of Sports Sciences · doi:10.1080/02640414.2015.1088659 · Cited by 74
Gyro Mechanical Performance: The Most Important Parameter
Weinberg, H. (2011) · Cited by 69
Evaluating the properties of the coefficient of multiple correlation (CMC) for kinematic gait data
Røislien, J., Skare, Ø., Opheim, A. I., & Rennie, L. (2012) · Journal of Biomechanics · doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.05.014 · Cited by 58
Optimization of Inertial Sensor-Based Motion Capturing for Magnetically Distorted Field Applications
Schiefer, C., Ellegast, R. P., Hermanns, I., Kraus, T., Ochsmann, E., Larue, C., & Plamondon, A. (2014) · Journal of Biomechanical Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.4028822 · Cited by 35
Self-citationObjective assessment, repeatability, and agreement of shoulder ROM with a 3D gyroscope
El-Zayat, B. F., Efe, T., Heidrich, A., Anetsmann, R., Timmesfeld, N., Fuchs‐Winkelmann, S., & Schofer, M. D. (2013) · BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · doi:10.1186/1471-2474-14-72 · Cited by 22
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Survey of Motion Tracking Methods Based on Inertial Sensors: A Focus on Upper Limb Human Motion
Filippeschi, A., Schmitz, N., Miezal, M., Bleser, G., Ruffaldi, E., & Stricker, D. (2017) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s17061257 · Cited by 361
Inertial Measurement Units for Clinical Movement Analysis: Reliability and Concurrent Validity
Al-Amri, M., Nicholas, K., Button, K., Sparkes, V., Sheeran, L., & Davies, J. (2018) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s18030719 · Cited by 318
Validity and Reliability of Wearable Sensors for Joint Angle Estimation: A Systematic Review
Poitras, I., Dupuis, F., Bielmann, M., Campeau-Lecours, A., Mercier, C., Bouyer, L., & Roy, J.-S. (2019) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s19071555 · Cited by 309
Sensing of joint and spinal bending or stretching via a retractable and wearable badge reel
Li, C., Liu, D., Xu, C., Wang, Z., Shu, S., Sun, Z., Wang, Z. L., & Wang, Z. L. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-23207-8 · Cited by 230
Schall, M. C., Sesek, R. F., & Cavuoto, L. A. (2018) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720817753907 · Cited by 205
Metadata
- Authors
- Robert-Lachaine, X., Mecheri, H., Larue, C., & Plamondon, A.
- Affiliations
- Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (CA)
- Venue
- Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing
- Published
- 2016-07-05
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 609-619
- ISSN
- 0140-0118 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-0444
- OpenAlex
- W2460830751
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 27 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 16
- FWCI
- 35.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pharesst.irsst.qc.ca
- Locations
- Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PhareSST (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- IRSST (2012-0040, Postdoctoral program)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Inertial Sensor and Navigation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
- Keywords
- inertial measurement unit, optical motion capture, whole-body kinematics, technological errors, joint angles, task complexity, task duration, manual material handling, functional movement, local coordinate system, anatomical landmarks, Xsens, human factors, worker tracking
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Theoretical, Monitoring, Physiologic, Motion, Movement, Posture, Optics and Photonics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
