ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Cycle Metrics and Strategy Detection for Automated Chair Sit-to-Stand Test Analysis Employing a Single Smartphone.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical utility and methodological implementation of smartphone-based mobility analysis: a scoping review.Journal of neurology · 2026Article
- Optimizing camera placement in multi-view markerless motion capture: a validation study against gold-standard kinematics for static and dynamic tasks.BMC research notes · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe 30-second Chair Sit-to-Stand Test (30 s CST) is widely used to assess lower-limb function and reflects complex motor coordination across neural systems. However, conventional scoring methods are often inconsistent and fail to capture variations in compensatory movement strategies or require invasive instrumentation. This study presents a smartphone-based system that automatically detects rising strategies across repeated CST cycles, providing an automated approach to extract cycle-level biomarkers of motor performance.
methodsThirty-five adults 10 younger, 20 older, and 5 with Parkinson's disease performed supervised 30-s CST trials while wearing a waist-mounted smartphone that recorded accelerometer and gyroscope data at 400 Hz. Cycle detection used amplitude-adaptive thresholds and dominant-frequency intervals for robust segmentation of CST cycles. Rising strategies were classified with rule-based method that uses trunk pitch dynamics and cycle duration. Agreement with video annotations was assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC (2, 1)), Bland-Altman analysis, and macro F1 scores.
resultsThe algorithm detected 660 CST cycles with 99% accuracy, and the average mean absolute error across participants was under 40 ms. Bland-Altman analysis showed negligible bias (- 0.012 s) and narrow limits of agreement (- 0.134 to 0.110 s). Strategy classification achieved macro F1 = 0.94. Flexion cycles were consistently longer than Momentum Transfer cycles (e.g., older adults: 2.63 vs. 1.45 s).
conclusionAutomated CST analysis reveals movement signatures not captured by standard timing, offering a richer characterization of mobility patterns. While these findings demonstrate technical feasibility and highlight clinically relevant variations, their application for diagnostic or personalized rehabilitation purposes remains preliminary and requires validation in larger cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.