ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Convergent Validity of Step Counts Collected from a Smart Knee Implant and a Smartphone-Based Care Management Application: A 7861-Patient Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- From One-Size-Fits-All to Data-Driven Recovery: A Narrative Review of Wearable Technologies Toward Personalized Rehabilitation After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionStep counts are increasingly used to assess mobility and track recovery following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to assess the convergent validity of step count data captured by a smart implantable device (SID) in comparison with step counts derived from established, validated sensor-based technology.
methodsA secondary analysis of an anonymized commercial database (N = 7861, median age: 68, female: 59%, median BMI: 31.7) of patients who received an SID and used a digital care management application (App) with or without a smart watch. The SID recorded "qualified steps", defined as periods of walking for at least seven steps that met predefined acceleration and cadence thresholds between 7 am and 10 pm. The App collected total daily step counts via smartwatch and/or smartphone. Pearson correlations were calculated between SID and App data at 30, 90, and 180 days post-operative. Step counts at 30, 90, and 180 days post-operative were compared between groups with the Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was assessed at
resultsStep counts increased throughout the recovery period as measured by all three devices. SID-captured fewer qualified steps than App-captured step counts from watch-wearers throughout the post-operative period (
conclusionsThe SID's qualified step metric demonstrated consistent, moderate, correlations with app-based step counts across 30, 90, and 180 days. While smartwatch-based tools recorded higher absolute step counts, both technologies reflected similar recovery trajectories.
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.