Cited by 12Context-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsInertial Sensor and NavigationSports Dynamics and Biomechanics

The Validity of Wireless Earbud-Type Wearable Sensors for Head Angle Estimation and the Relationships of Head with Trunk, Pelvis, Hip, and Knee during Workouts

Open access
Kim, Ae-Ryeong, Park, Ju-Hyun, Kim, Si-Hyun, Kim, Kwang Bok, Park, Kyue-Nam·2022·Sensors

Abstract

The present study was performed to investigate the validity of a wireless earbud-type inertial measurement unit (Ear-IMU) sensor used to estimate head angle during four workouts. In addition, relationships between head angle obtained from the Ear-IMU sensor and the angles of other joints determined with a 3D motion analysis system were investigated. The study population consisted of 20 active volunteers. The Ear-IMU sensor measured the head angle, while a 3D motion analysis system simultaneously measured the angles of the head, trunk, pelvis, hips, and knees during workouts. Comparison with the head angle measured using the 3D motion analysis system indicated that the validity of the Ear-IMU sensor was very strong or moderate in the sagittal and frontal planes. In addition, the trunk angle in the frontal plane showed a fair correlation with the head angle determined with the Ear-IMU sensor during a single-leg squat, reverse lunge, and standing hip abduction; the correlation was poor in the sagittal plane. Our results indicated that the Ear-IMU sensor can be used to directly estimate head motion and indirectly estimate trunk motion.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/s22020597

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 variables like head angle or knee in the frontal plane, IMUs represent a more robust alternative, as they provide high-frequency, three-dimensional orientation data that is independent of camera position and field of view.

    “In variables like head angle or knee in the frontal plane IMUs represent a more robust alternative [60,61,62], as they provide high-frequency, three-dimensional orientation data that is independent of camera position and field of view.”

    From Intra-Rater and Test–Retest Reliability of Kinovea for the Kinematic Analysis of Squatting in Healthy Active Women (2026) · cites this paper as [62]

    The Discussion and Conclusions report moderate-to-very-strong validity for earbud-IMU head-angle measurements in the sagittal and frontal planes during workouts. The Instruments section reports 100 Hz sampling, but the Data Processing section says the study estimated only sagittal and frontal angles; knee angles were measured by the 3D motion-analysis system, not the IMU. The paper does not establish a robustness advantage based on camera position or field of view. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [30]Cristiano A. Nazemzadeh P. Tettamanti A. Sanna A. Trojaniello D. Head acceleration patterns in postural transitions and straight walking: A preliminary study Proceedings of the GNB2018 Milan, Italy 25–27 June 2018
  2. [34]Chan Y.H. Biostatistics 104. Corrleational analysis Singapore Med. J. 2005 46 153 160 15800720

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, A.-R., Park, J.-H., Kim, S.-H., Kim, K. B., & Park, K.-N.
Affiliations
  • Jeonju University (KR)
  • Sangji University (KR)
  • Korea Institute of Industrial Technology (KR)
  • Department of Rehabilitation Science, Jeonju University, Jeonju 55069, Korea
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-01-13
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
597
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205838152
Cited by
12
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2
FWCI
0.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Research Foundation of Korea (No. 2020R1A2C2102729)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Inertial Sensor and Navigation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Keywords
inertial measurement unit, wearable sensors, sensor validity, 3D motion analysis, trunk angle, hip joint angle, knee joint angle, pelvic angle, single-leg squat
MeSH terms
Wearable Electronic Devices, Biomechanical Phenomena, Humans, Knee Joint, Pelvis, Torso

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