4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Wearable Sensor-Based Real-Time Gait Detection: A Systematic Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Gait analysis has traditionally been carried out in a laboratory environment using expensive equipment, but, recently, reliable, affordable, and wearable sensors have enabled integration into clinical applications as well as use during activities of daily living. Real-time gait analysis is key to the development of gait rehabilitation techniques and assistive devices such as neuroprostheses. This article presents a systematic review of wearable sensors and techniques used in real-time gait analysis, and their application to pathological gait. From four major scientific databases, we identified 1262 articles of which 113 were analyzed in full-text. We found that heel strike and toe off are the most sought-after gait events. Inertial measurement units (IMU) are the most widely used wearable sensors and the shank and foot are the preferred placements. Insole pressure sensors are the most common sensors for ground-truth validation for IMU-based gait detection. Rule-based techniques relying on threshold or peak detection are the most widely used gait detection method. The heterogeneity of evaluation criteria prevented quantitative performance comparison of all methods. Although most studies predicted that the proposed methods would work on pathological gait, less than one third were validated on such data. Clinical applications of gait detection algorithms were considered, and we recommend a combination of IMU and rule-based methods as an optimal solution.

          Related collections

          Most cited references138

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

          Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping

            We present VOSviewer, a freely available computer program that we have developed for constructing and viewing bibliometric maps. Unlike most computer programs that are used for bibliometric mapping, VOSviewer pays special attention to the graphical representation of bibliometric maps. The functionality of VOSviewer is especially useful for displaying large bibliometric maps in an easy-to-interpret way. The paper consists of three parts. In the first part, an overview of VOSviewer’s functionality for displaying bibliometric maps is provided. In the second part, the technical implementation of specific parts of the program is discussed. Finally, in the third part, VOSviewer’s ability to handle large maps is demonstrated by using the program to construct and display a co-citation map of 5,000 major scientific journals.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching

              Google Scholar (GS), a commonly used web-based academic search engine, catalogues between 2 and 100 million records of both academic and grey literature (articles not formally published by commercial academic publishers). Google Scholar collates results from across the internet and is free to use. As a result it has received considerable attention as a method for searching for literature, particularly in searches for grey literature, as required by systematic reviews. The reliance on GS as a standalone resource has been greatly debated, however, and its efficacy in grey literature searching has not yet been investigated. Using systematic review case studies from environmental science, we investigated the utility of GS in systematic reviews and in searches for grey literature. Our findings show that GS results contain moderate amounts of grey literature, with the majority found on average at page 80. We also found that, when searched for specifically, the majority of literature identified using Web of Science was also found using GS. However, our findings showed moderate/poor overlap in results when similar search strings were used in Web of Science and GS (10–67%), and that GS missed some important literature in five of six case studies. Furthermore, a general GS search failed to find any grey literature from a case study that involved manual searching of organisations’ websites. If used in systematic reviews for grey literature, we recommend that searches of article titles focus on the first 200 to 300 results. We conclude that whilst Google Scholar can find much grey literature and specific, known studies, it should not be used alone for systematic review searches. Rather, it forms a powerful addition to other traditional search methods. In addition, we advocate the use of tools to transparently document and catalogue GS search results to maintain high levels of transparency and the ability to be updated, critical to systematic reviews.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Sensors (Basel)
                Sensors (Basel)
                sensors
                Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
                MDPI
                1424-8220
                13 April 2021
                April 2021
                : 21
                : 8
                : 2727
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ONWARD, Building 32, Hightech Campus, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands; hari.prasanth@ 123456onwd.com
                [2 ]Faculty of Mechanical, Maritime and Materials Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, 2628 CD Delft, The Netherlands
                [3 ]Institute of Bioengineering, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; miroslav.caban@ 123456epfl.ch (M.C.); auke.ijspeert@ 123456epfl.ch (A.I.)
                [4 ]ONWARD, EPFL Innovation Park Building C, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; urs.keller@ 123456onwd.com (U.K.); joachim.vonzitzewitz@ 123456onwd.com (J.v.Z.)
                [5 ]Center for Neuroprosthetics and Brain Mind Institute, School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL), 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; gregoire.courtine@ 123456epfl.ch
                [6 ]Department of Neurosurgery, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
                [7 ]Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and University of Lausanne (UNIL), 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
                [8 ]Defitech Center for Interventional Neurotherapies (.NeuroRestore), CHUV/UNIL/EPFL, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland
                [9 ]Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: h.vallery@ 123456tudelft.nl
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2627-4291
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4662-9088
                Article
                sensors-21-02727
                10.3390/s21082727
                8069962
                33924403
                955b0bfe-975a-4683-b7c7-c1f9578aaa05
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 February 2021
                : 08 April 2021
                Categories
                Systematic Review

                Biomedical engineering
                wearable sensor,real-time gait detection,gait analysis,insole pressure sensors,inertial measurement unit,pathological gait,gait rehabilitation,assistive device

                Comments

                Comment on this article