Cited by 117Sports Dynamics and BiomechanicsSports Performance and TrainingLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies

Concurrent validation of an inertial measurement system to quantify kicking biomechanics in four football codes

Blair, Stephanie, Duthie, Grant, Robertson, Sam, Hopkins, William, Ball, Kevin·2018·Journal of Biomechanics

Abstract

Wearable inertial measurement systems (IMS) allow for three-dimensional analysis of human movements in a sport-specific setting. This study examined the concurrent validity of a IMS (Xsens MVN system) for measuring lower extremity and pelvis kinematics in comparison to a Vicon motion analysis system (MAS) during kicking. Thirty footballers from Australian football (n = 10), soccer (n = 10), rugby league and rugby union (n = 10) clubs completed 20 kicks across four conditions. Concurrent validity was assessed using a linear mixed-modelling approach, which allowed the partition of between and within-subject variance from the device measurement error. Results were expressed in raw and standardised units for assessments of differences in means and measurement error, and interpreted via non-clinical magnitude-based inferences. Trivial to small differences were found in linear velocities (foot and pelvis), angular velocities (knee, shank and thigh), sagittal joint (knee and hip) and segment angle (shank and pelvis) means (mean difference: 0.2-5.8%) between the IMS and MAS in Australian football, soccer and the rugby codes. Trivial to small measurement errors (from 0.1 to 5.8%) were found between the IMS and MAS in all kinematic parameters. The IMS demonstrated acceptable levels of concurrent validity compared to a MAS when measuring kicking biomechanics across the four football codes. Wearable IMS offers various benefits over MAS, such as, out-of-laboratory testing, larger measurement range and quick data output, to help improve the ecological validity of biomechanical testing and the timing of feedback. The results advocate the use of IMS to quantify biomechanics of high-velocity movements in sport-specific settings.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.03.031

Cites

57 of 57 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
Blair, S., Duthie, G., Robertson, S., Hopkins, W., & Ball, K.
Affiliations
Victoria University (AU)
Corresponding author
Blair, Stephanie
Venue
Journal of Biomechanics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
73
Pages
24-32
ISSN
0021-9290 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2791364990
Cited by
117
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 5
FWCI
5.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Biomechanics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Victoria University Research Repository (Victoria University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Keywords
inertial measurement unit, concurrent validity, kicking biomechanics, lower limb kinematics, pelvis kinematics, Australian football, soccer, rugby league, rugby union, wearable sensors, measurement error, magnitude-based inference
MeSH terms
Australia, Biomechanical Phenomena, Humans, Male, Movement, Soccer, Lower Extremity, Mechanical Phenomena, Young Adult

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