dc.contributor.author
Stamm, Oskar
dc.contributor.author
Heimann-Steinert, Anika
dc.date.accessioned
2021-04-16T08:38:53Z
dc.date.available
2021-04-16T08:38:53Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/30382
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-30123
dc.description.abstract
Background:
Expensive optoelectronic systems, considered the gold standard, require a laboratory environment and the attachment of markers, and they are therefore rarely used in everyday clinical practice. Two-dimensional (2D) human pose estimations for clinical purposes allow kinematic analyses to be carried out via a camera-based smartphone app. Since clinical specialists highly depend on the validity of information, there is a need to evaluate the accuracy of 2D pose estimation apps.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to investigate the accuracy of the 2D pose estimation of a mobility analysis app (Lindera-v2), using the PanopticStudio Toolbox data set as a reference standard. The study aimed to assess the differences in joint angles obtained by 2D video information generated with the Lindera-v2 algorithm and the reference standard. The results can provide an important assessment of the adequacy of the app for clinical use.
Methods:
To evaluate the accuracy of the Lindera-v2 algorithm, 10 video sequences were analyzed. Accuracy was evaluated by assessing a total of 30,000 data pairs for each joint (10 joints in total), comparing the angle data obtained from the Lindera-v2 algorithm with those of the reference standard. The mean differences of the angles were calculated for each joint, and a comparison was made between the estimated values and the reference standard values. Furthermore, the mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error, and symmetric mean absolute percentage error of the 2D angles were calculated. Agreement between the 2 measurement methods was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC[A,2]). A cross-correlation was calculated for the time series to verify whether there was a temporal shift in the data.
Results:
The mean difference of the Lindera-v2 data in the right hip was the closest to the reference standard, with a mean value difference of –0.05° (SD 6.06°). The greatest difference in comparison with the baseline was found in the neck, with a measurement of –3.07° (SD 6.43°). The MAE of the angle measurement closest to the baseline was observed in the pelvis (1.40°, SD 1.48°). In contrast, the largest MAE was observed in the right shoulder (6.48°, SD 8.43°). The medians of all acquired joints ranged in difference from 0.19° to 3.17° compared with the reference standard. The ICC values ranged from 0.951 (95% CI 0.914-0.969) in the neck to 0.997 (95% CI 0.997-0.997) in the left elbow joint. The cross-correlation showed that the Lindera-v2 algorithm had no temporal lag.
Conclusions:
The results of the study indicate that a 2D pose estimation by means of a smartphone app can have excellent agreement compared with a validated reference standard. An assessment of kinematic variables can be performed with the analyzed algorithm, showing only minimal deviations compared with data from a massive multiview system.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
2D human pose estimation
en
dc.subject
motion capturing
en
dc.subject
clinical practice
en
dc.subject
smartphone app
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Accuracy of Monocular Two-Dimensional Pose Estimation Compared With a Reference Standard for Kinematic Multiview Analysis: Validation Study
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
e19608
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.2196/19608
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
12
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
JMIR Publications
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
8
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
33346739
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2291-5222