The Sit-to-Stand (STS) test is used in clinical practice as an indicator of lower-limb functionality decline, especially for older adults. Due to its high variability, there is no standard approach for categorising the STS movement and recognising its motion pattern. This paper presents a comparative analysis between visual assessments and an automated-software for the categorisation of STS, relying on registrations from a force plate. 5 participants (30 ± 6 years) took part in 2 different sessions of visual inspections on 200 STS movements under self-paced and controlled speed conditions. Assessors were asked to identify three specific STS events from the Ground Reaction Force, simultaneously with the software analysis: the start of the trunk movement (Initiation), the beginning of the stable upright stance (Standing) and the sitting movement (Sitting). The absolute agreement between the repeated raters’ assessments as well as between the raters’ and software’s assessment in the first trial, were considered as indexes of human and software performance, respectively. No statistical differences between methods were found for the identification of the Initiation and the Sitting events at self-paced speed and for only the Sitting event at controlled speed. The estimated significant values of maximum discrepancy between visual and automated assessments were 0.200 [0.039; 0.361] s in unconstrained conditions and 0.340 [0.014; 0.666] s for standardised movements. The software assessments displayed an overall good agreement against visual evaluations of the Ground Reaction Force, relying, at the same time, on objective measures.

中文翻译：

---

坐姿运动模式分类中人与软件可​​靠性的定量比较

坐姿（STS）测试在临床实践中被用作下肢功能下降的指标，特别是对于老年人。由于其高度可变性，因此没有用于对STS运动进行分类并识别其运动模式的标准方法。本文介绍了视觉评估和自动软件之间的比较分析，该软件用于STS的分类，这取决于测力板的配准。5名参与者（30±6岁）参加了2次不同的视觉检查会议，这些检查是在自定速度和可控速度条件下对200个STS运动进行的。评估人员被要求从地面反作用力中识别出三个特定的STS事件，同时进行软件分析：躯干运动的开始（开始），稳定的直立姿势（站立）和坐姿运动（坐着）的开始。在第一次试验中，重复评估者的评估之间以及评估者和软件评估之间的绝对一致性分别被视为人员和软件性能的指标。在以自定速度进行的起始事件和就座事件的识别以及在受控速度下的就座事件的识别方法之间，没有发现统计差异。视觉评估与自动化评估之间的最大差异的估计显着值为0.200 [0.039; 在不受约束的条件下为0.361 [s]，在0.340 [0.014; 0.666] s（标准运动）。软件评估与地面反作用力的视觉评估显示出总体良好的一致性，同时，