Cited by 37Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesGait Recognition and AnalysisBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

Predicting ground contact events for a continuum of gait types: An application of targeted machine learning using principal component analysis

Osis, Sean T., Hettinga, Blayne A., Ferber, Reed·2016·Gait & Posture

Abstract

An ongoing challenge in the application of gait analysis to clinical settings is the standardized detection of temporal events, with unobtrusive and cost-effective equipment, for a wide range of gait types. The purpose of the current study was to investigate a targeted machine learning approach for the prediction of timing for foot strike (or initial contact) and toe-off, using only kinematics for walking, forefoot running, and heel-toe running. Data were categorized by gait type and split into a training set (∼30%) and a validation set (∼70%). A principal component analysis was performed, and separate linear models were trained and validated for foot strike and toe-off, using ground reaction force data as a gold-standard for event timing. Results indicate the model predicted both foot strike and toe-off timing to within 20ms of the gold-standard for more than 95% of cases in walking and running gaits. The machine learning approach continues to provide robust timing predictions for clinical use, and may offer a flexible methodology to handle new events and gait types.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.02.021

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Osis, S. T., Hettinga, B. A., & Ferber, R.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Osis, Sean T.
Venue
Gait & Posture
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-05
Volume
46
Pages
86-90
ISSN
0966-6362 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2288603929
Cited by
37
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Gait & Posture (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (1030390)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Gait Recognition and Analysis
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
gait event detection, foot strike, toe-off, gait analysis, walking, running, ground reaction force, kinematics, principal component analysis, linear models
MeSH terms
Machine Learning, Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Exercise Test, Female, Gait, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Reference Values, Running, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Linear Models, Walking, Weight-Bearing, Principal Component Analysis

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