Back

Validation of Gait Tasks in SynapTrack Mobile App for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Lewis, A.; Arkam, F.; Steel, B.; Chen, E.; Singh, P.; Yakdan, S.; Becker, I.; Guo, W.; Shahrabani, A.; Payne, P. R.; Ghogawala, Z.; Steinmetz, M. P.; Neuman, B.; Ray, W. Z.; Duncan, R.; Greenberg, J.

2026-05-29 surgery
10.64898/2026.05.27.26354225 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Gait impairment is a central sign of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) that is typically evaluated through subjective patient-reported questionnaires or objective in-clinic measures. These systems require substantial resources to administer and are poorly suited for longitudinal monitoring, however, emerging smartphone applications present an efficient alternative. We developed and assessed the validity of a data processing framework based on the SynapTrack smartphone application to assess gait function in individuals with CSM. Methods Participants completed walking tasks which were recorded on both the SynapTrack app and a gold standard gait mat. Acceleration data extracted from the smartphone by the app were filtered and processed to produce gait cycle features including velocity, step time, waveform features and frequency domain features. Standard gait features were compared across the two methods by correlation and Bland-Altman plots to assess validity. App-based gait features were then compared to the standard modified Japanese Orthopedic Assessment (mJOA) assessment to determine construct validity through correlation and ability to discriminate between individuals with CSM and healthy controls. Finally, intraclass correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation were used to measure test-retest reliability and standard variation across app features. Results A total of 110 participants were included in this study, of which 55 (50%) had CSM, 24 (22%) had peripheral neuropathy, and 31 (28%) were healthy controls. SynapTrack gait measures including velocity, step time, and double support showed strong validity as indicated through Bland-Altman plots and high correlation (>0.8) with mat features. In addition to the gait features, acceleration root mean square, acceleration crest, spectral entropy, and dominant frequency showed strong construct validity compared to the mJOA across correlation (0.2-0.54), trend test (p < 0.001), and AUROC (0.62-0.79) analyses. ICCs showed moderate test-retest reliability (0.52-0.67). Discussion The proposed framework for processing gait data showed strong validity compared to the gold standard mat and high construct validity compared to the mJOA suggesting the utility of the SynapTrack app as an efficient alternative to existing methods. The confirmation of gait metrics related to CSM severity and identification of relevant waveform and frequency domain features present opportunities to use smartphone apps to develop ecologically valid data driven markers of CSM severity.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
20.1%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.3%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 8%
8.7%
4
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
6.6%
50% of probability mass above
5
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.1%
6
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.8%
7
Gait & Posture
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
8
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.0%
9
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
10
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
11
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
12
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.8%
13
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
15
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
16
Neurobiology of Disease
134 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
17
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
18
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
19
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
21
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
22
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
23
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
24
Muscle & Nerve
10 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.5%
25
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 28%
0.5%
26
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%