Validation of Automated Countermovement Vertical Jump Analysis: Markerless Pose Estimation vs. 3D Marker-Based Motion Capture System

• Published in: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Vol. 24; no. 20; p. 6624
• Main Authors: Aleksic, Jelena, Kanevsky, Dmitry, Mesaroš, David, Knezevic, Olivera M, Cabarkapa, Dimitrije, Bozovic, Branislav, Mirkov, Dragan M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 14.10.2024; MDPI
• Subjects: Accuracy; Adult; Analysis; Ankle; Automation; Biomechanical Phenomena; Biomechanics; Cameras; center of mass; Computer animation; Computer programs; Female; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods; jump; Jumping; Kinematics; Male; MMPose; Motion Capture; motion tracking; Movement - physiology; Reproducibility of Results; Smart phones; Smartphone; Smartphones; Software; Young Adult; Sweden; MMPose; accuracy; motion tracking; biomechanics; center of mass; jump
• ISSN: 1424-8220; 1424-8220
• DOI: 10.3390/s24206624

This study aimed to validate the automated temporal analysis of countermovement vertical jump (CMJ) using MMPose, a markerless pose estimation framework, by comparing it with the gold-standard 3D marker-based motion capture system. Twelve participants performed five CMJ trials, which were simultaneously recorded using the marker-based system and two smartphone cameras capturing both sides of the body. Key kinematic points, including center of mass (CoM) and toe trajectories, were analyzed to determine jump phases and temporal variables. The agreement between methods was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis, root mean square error (RMSE), and Pearson's correlation coefficient (r), while consistency was evaluated via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3,1) and two-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Cohen's effect size (d) quantified the practical significance of differences. Results showed strong agreement (r > 0.98) with minimal bias and narrow limits of agreement for most variables. The markerless system slightly overestimated jump height and CoM vertical velocity, but ICC values (ICC > 0.91) confirmed strong reliability. Cohen's d values were near zero, indicating trivial differences, and no variability due to recording side was observed. Overall, MMPose proved to be a reliable alternative for in-field CMJ analysis, supporting its broader application in sports and rehabilitation settings.