Why the study?
It was unknown whether between-day differences in running gait variability from wearables reflect health-related shifts in system dynamics or poor between-day reliability of the device or signal.
Do inertial measurement units provide reliable between-day running gait variability measures in runners?
Do inertial measurement units provide reliable between-day running gait variability measures in runners?
IMU-derived running gait variability measures show moderate to poor between-day reliability with large minimum detectable changes, suggesting caution when interpreting these metrics in clinical contexts.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Between-day reliability of IMU-derived stride time and sacral acceleration variability is limited by large minimum detectable changes; leaves open clinical interpretation of health-related shifts in runners.
Changes to the variability within biomechanical signals may reflect a change in the health of the human system. However, for running gait variability measures calculated from wearable device data, it is unknown whether a between-day difference reflects a shift in system dynamics reflective of a change in human health or is a result of poor between-day reliability of the measurement device or the biomechanical signal. This study investigated the reliability of stride time and sacral acceleration variability measures calculated from inertial measurement units (IMUs). Nineteen runners completed six treadmill running trials on two occasions seven days apart. Stride time and sacral acceleration signals were obtained using IMUs. Stride time variability and complexity were calculated using the coefficient of variation (CV) and detrended fluctuation analysis (DFA), respectively. Sacral acceleration regularity was quantified using sample entropy with a range of input parameters m (vector length) and r (similarity threshold). Between-day reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimum detectable change. Stride time CV displayed moderate relative reliability (ICC = 0.672), but with a large absolute minimum detectable change = 0.525 %, whilst stride time DFA-α displayed poor relative reliability (ICC = 0.457) and yielded large minimum detectable changes (≥ 0.208). Sample entropy displayed good relative reliability in mediolateral and resultant sacral acceleration signals for certain combinations of the parameters m and r, although again with large minimum detectable changes. Researchers should be cognisant of these reliability metrics when interpreting changes in running gait variability measures in clinical contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jones et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: