Agreement between subjective gait assessment and markerless video gait-analysis in endurance horses.

IF 2.4 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Mariaelena de Chiara, Chiara Montano, Andrea De Matteis, Livia Guidi, Francesco Buono, Luigi Auletta, Chiara Del Prete, Maria Pia Pasolini
{"title":"Agreement between subjective gait assessment and markerless video gait-analysis in endurance horses.","authors":"Mariaelena de Chiara, Chiara Montano, Andrea De Matteis, Livia Guidi, Francesco Buono, Luigi Auletta, Chiara Del Prete, Maria Pia Pasolini","doi":"10.1111/evj.14516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Subjective evaluation of gait by official endurance veterinarians (OEVs) is used to determine 'fitness-to-compete' in horses participating in endurance competitions. Objective gait analysis systems could aid in quick and verifiable judgements.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the agreement between objective analysis of head and pelvis vertical movement asymmetry performed with a markerless artificial intelligence motion tracking system (AI-MTS) and subjective lameness assessment performed by an accredited FEI OEV to judge horse gaits.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cross-sectional.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>During three endurance competitions, 110 horses were enrolled. The OEV performed 188 gait examinations, which were simultaneously recorded with a smartphone. The vertical motion asymmetry of the head and pelvis was later analysed from the videos through the AI-MTS application. The gaits were scored as 'no asymmetry', 'mild asymmetry' or 'severe asymmetry'. The agreement was evaluated using Fleiss' multi-rater kappa statistic (κ).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The overall agreement between the two methods was fair (k = 0.26, p < 0.001). Within the three gait asymmetry categories, substantial agreement was obtained for the 'severe' (k = 0.75, p < 0.001) category, fair agreement was detected for the 'no asymmetry' category (k = 0.25, p < 0.001), and no agreement was identified for the 'mild' category (k = 0.13, p = 0.08).</p><p><strong>Main limitations: </strong>Comparison between AI-MTS and a single OEV; absence of a tripod during video recording; and video recording from a different point of view than the OEVs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Mild asymmetry was the most challenging gait category to identify. Substantial agreement between the subjective lameness evaluation by OEV and AI-MTS assessment was observed for the 'severe' category. AI-MTS may be a helpful tool to assist OEVs in decision-making during endurance competitions.</p>","PeriodicalId":11796,"journal":{"name":"Equine Veterinary Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Equine Veterinary Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.14516","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Subjective evaluation of gait by official endurance veterinarians (OEVs) is used to determine 'fitness-to-compete' in horses participating in endurance competitions. Objective gait analysis systems could aid in quick and verifiable judgements.

Objectives: To assess the agreement between objective analysis of head and pelvis vertical movement asymmetry performed with a markerless artificial intelligence motion tracking system (AI-MTS) and subjective lameness assessment performed by an accredited FEI OEV to judge horse gaits.

Study design: Cross-sectional.

Methods: During three endurance competitions, 110 horses were enrolled. The OEV performed 188 gait examinations, which were simultaneously recorded with a smartphone. The vertical motion asymmetry of the head and pelvis was later analysed from the videos through the AI-MTS application. The gaits were scored as 'no asymmetry', 'mild asymmetry' or 'severe asymmetry'. The agreement was evaluated using Fleiss' multi-rater kappa statistic (κ).

Results: The overall agreement between the two methods was fair (k = 0.26, p < 0.001). Within the three gait asymmetry categories, substantial agreement was obtained for the 'severe' (k = 0.75, p < 0.001) category, fair agreement was detected for the 'no asymmetry' category (k = 0.25, p < 0.001), and no agreement was identified for the 'mild' category (k = 0.13, p = 0.08).

Main limitations: Comparison between AI-MTS and a single OEV; absence of a tripod during video recording; and video recording from a different point of view than the OEVs.

Conclusions: Mild asymmetry was the most challenging gait category to identify. Substantial agreement between the subjective lameness evaluation by OEV and AI-MTS assessment was observed for the 'severe' category. AI-MTS may be a helpful tool to assist OEVs in decision-making during endurance competitions.

耐力马主观步态评估与无标记视频步态分析的一致性。
背景:官方耐力兽医(OEVs)对步态的主观评价用于确定参加耐力比赛的马的“健康状况”。客观的步态分析系统有助于快速和可验证的判断。目的:评估无标记人工智能运动跟踪系统(AI-MTS)对头部和骨盆垂直运动不对称的客观分析与由认可的FEI OEV进行主观跛行评估以判断马步态之间的一致性。研究设计:横断面。方法:在三场耐力赛中,共选入110匹马。OEV进行了188次步态检查,同时用智能手机记录下来。随后通过AI-MTS应用从视频中分析头部和骨盆的垂直运动不对称性。他们的步态被分为“完全不对称”、“轻微不对称”和“严重不对称”。采用Fleiss多等级kappa统计量(κ)对一致性进行评价。结果:两种方法的总体一致性是公平的(k = 0.26, p)。主要局限性:AI-MTS与单一OEV的比较;录像时没有三脚架;以及从与oev不同的角度录制视频。结论:轻度不对称是最难识别的步态类型。在“严重”类别中,OEV主观跛行评估与AI-MTS评估之间存在实质性的一致。AI-MTS可能会成为辅助电动汽车在耐力比赛中进行决策的有用工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Equine Veterinary Journal
Equine Veterinary Journal 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
13.60%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Equine Veterinary Journal publishes evidence to improve clinical practice or expand scientific knowledge underpinning equine veterinary medicine. This unrivalled international scientific journal is published 6 times per year, containing peer-reviewed articles with original and potentially important findings. Contributions are received from sources worldwide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信