| Title |
Validation of inertial measurement units with an optoelectronic system for whole-body motion analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11517-016-1537-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xavier Robert-Lachaine, Hakim Mecheri, Christian Larue, André Plamondon |
| Abstract |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 385 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 384 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 63 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 62 | 16% |
| Researcher | 39 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 37 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 3% |
| Other | 54 | 14% |
| Unknown | 117 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 111 | 29% |
| Sports and Recreations | 39 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 14 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 3% |
| Other | 43 | 11% |
| Unknown | 146 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing
#1,677
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,664
of 370,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing
#13
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,053 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,460 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.