2014 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/haptics.2014.6775498
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental evaluation of Microsoft Kinect's accuracy and capture rate for stroke rehabilitation applications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In recent years, the computer vision community has proposed an array of solutions to solve this challenge, but majority are not validated clinically. These works have predominantly focused on depth sensor technology, removing the need for intrusive sensors, which has been shown to be sufficiently accurate and responsive for tracking in both in-home and clinical settings [10], [12], [13].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In recent years, the computer vision community has proposed an array of solutions to solve this challenge, but majority are not validated clinically. These works have predominantly focused on depth sensor technology, removing the need for intrusive sensors, which has been shown to be sufficiently accurate and responsive for tracking in both in-home and clinical settings [10], [12], [13].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, these systems provide a single health indicator whereas an in-depth descriptive indicator could prove more useful to a clinician. In addition, existing systems have been evaluated using game-orientated datasets, and without clinical validation [5], [6], [10]. We utilise the newly released K3Da dataset [11], which consists of clinically relevant motions captured using the Kinect One sensor to validate the proposed framework.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, marker-based systems always set up multiple markers (Fig. 2.3) [42,49] for calibration by comparing the difference in the relative positions of the markers from the sensors or comparing the relative speeds of moving markers [47]. The advantage of the marker-based systems' calibration is the stable accuracy; IR sensors are robust to the influence of the environment of the measurement area.…”
Section: Calibrationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several other authors have used Kinect for the measurement of shoulder motion [30][31][32][33][34][35] . The accuracy of Kinect, which does not require the attachment of markers to determine limb position, has been validated in comparison with marker-based systems [36][37][38][39][40][41] . The present study was undertaken to explore the relationship between subjective and observer-independent objective measures of shoulder function.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%