IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0360793.html

The ability of the commercial inertial measurement unit-based gait system in determining Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies

Author

Listed:
  • Jiahao Pan
  • Hui Tang

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to use the meta-analytic approach to investigate the ability of Inertial Measurement Unit-based commercial system measured gait variability and asymmetry in distinguishing individuals with Parkinson’s disease (PD) from healthy controls (HC). Cross-sectional studies included using commercial IMU-based systems measuring gait variability or asymmetry at any stage of PD patients and healthy adults were included. Studies were determined by searching for four electronic databases and cross-referencing. Dual selection and data abstraction of studies were conducted. Hedges’ g standardized mean difference was calculated for each variable and pooled using inverse heterogeneity mode. Statistically significant was determined by two tailed z-alpha values ≤0.05 and non-overlapping 95% CI. Heterogeneity was estimated using Q and I2 with alpha values ≤0.10 for Q considered statistically significant. Small-study effects were examined using doi plots and LFK index. A total of 1,725 studies were screened. Eventually, 9 studies representing up to 571 PD patients and 470 HC met the inclusion criteria. Overall gait variability was significantly greater in individuals with PD than in HC (Hedges’ g = 0.368, 95% CI 0.139–0.597). The multi-IMU subgroup also showed significantly greater gait variability (Hedges’ g = 0.397, 95% CI 0.221–0.574), whereas the one-IMU subgroup did not. However, the between-subgroup difference was not statistically significant, and the multi-IMU prediction interval included null. The primary analysis detected no statistically significant overall difference in gait asymmetry (Hedges’ g = 0.180, 95% CI −0.012–0.373). These findings provide preliminary evidence of an average group-level difference in gait variability but hard to establish individual-level discrimination, clinical utility, or the superiority of multi-IMU systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiahao Pan & Hui Tang, 2026. "The ability of the commercial inertial measurement unit-based gait system in determining Parkinson’s disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(10), pages 1-18, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0360793
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0360793
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0360793
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0360793&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0360793?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0360793. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.