IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,295,727
Granted Patent B2
US 12,295,727 · App. 18/620,011 · Granted May 13, 2025

Gait-based assessment of neurodegeneration

Inventors: Richard Morris (San Antonio, TX); Barbara Schnan Mastronardi (San Antonio, TX)
Assignee: GaitIQ, Inc.
A61B5/112A61B5/1127A61B5/4082A61B5/4088G06N20/00G06T7/74G06V20/46G06V40/25G06T2207/10016G06T2207/20081G06T2207/30196G06T2207/30204G06T2210/22
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,295,727
App. No.
18/620,011
Granted
May 13, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Neurodegeneration can be assessed based on a gait signature, using a machine-learning model trained on gait metrics acquired for a patient, in conjunction with cognitive test data and neuropathology information about the patient. The gait signature can be derived from gait kinematic data, e.g., as obtained with a video-based, marker-less motion capture system.

Claims (31)

1. A method for gait-based testing for a neurodegenerative condition in a patient, the method comprising:

acquiring gait kinematic data for the patient, the gait kinematic data comprising one or more time-dependent signals each representing a kinematic parameter of a joint or body segment;

processing the gait kinematic data with one or more computer processors to derive, from the one or more time-dependents signals, one or more respective gait metrics each indicative of a degree of variability, between curve segments for multiple strides within the respective time-dependent signal, in characteristic shapes of the curve segments; and

operating a machine-learning model on input comprising the one or more gait metrics, using the one or more computer processors, to determine at least one predictive score associated with the neurodegenerative condition and the patient, the machine-learning model trained on a training dataset comprising gait metrics derived from gait kinematic data for a plurality of patients along with evaluation scores quantifying the neurodegenerative condition in the respective one of the plurality of patients.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the time-dependent signals each representing a kinematic parameter comprise one or more of a linear position, a linear velocity, a linear acceleration, an angular position, an angular velocity, or an angular acceleration of a joint or body part.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein acquiring the gait kinematic data comprises processing video data of the patient walking.

4. The method of claim 3 , wherein the video data is acquired by a single camera.

5. The method of claim 3 , wherein processing the video data comprises using a machine-learning motion-analysis model to determine, based on the video data, time-dependent three-dimensional linear positions of joints or body parts.

6. The method of claim 5 , wherein processing the video data further comprises calculating time-dependent angular positions of joints or body segments from the time-dependent three-dimensional linear positions.

7. The method of claim 6 , wherein the time-dependent angular positions of joints or body segments comprise one or more of: pelvic tilt, pelvic list, pelvic rotation, hip flexion, hip adduction, hip rotation, knee angle, or ankle angle.

8. The method of claim 6 , wherein the one or more gait metrics comprise one or more gait complexity metrics.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluation scores comprise neuropathology scores derived from brain scans of the plurality of patients.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein the evaluation scores comprise cognitive scores based on cognitive testing of the plurality of patients.

11. The method of claim 1 , wherein the neurodegenerative condition comprises at least one of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, dementia, or heightened fall risk.

12. The method of claim 1 , wherein the at least one predictive score comprises at least one of a likelihood that the neurodegenerative condition is present in the patient or a quantifier of the degree to which the neurodegenerative condition is present.

13. A non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed by one or more hardware processors, cause the one or more hardware processors to perform operations for gait-based testing for a neurodegenerative condition in a patient, the operations comprising:

acquiring gait kinematic data for the patient, the gait kinematic data comprising one or more time-dependent signals each representing a kinematic parameter of a joint or body segment;

processing the gait kinematic data to derive, from the one or more time-dependents signals, one or more respective gait metrics each indicative of a degree of variability, between curve segments for multiple strides within the respective time-dependent signal, in characteristic shapes of the curve segments; and

operating a machine-learning model on input comprising the one or more gait metrics to determine at least one predictive score associated with the neurodegenerative condition and the patient, the machine-learning model trained on a training dataset comprising gait metrics derived from kinematic data for a plurality of patients along with evaluation scores quantifying the neurodegenerative condition in the respective one of the plurality of patients.

14. The machine-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein acquiring the gait kinematic data comprises processing video data of the patient walking, the video data acquired by a single camera.

15. The machine-readable medium of claim 14 , wherein processing the video data comprises using a machine-learning motion-analysis model to determine, based on the video data, time-dependent three-dimensional linear positions of joints or body parts.

16. The machine-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein processing the video data further comprises calculating time-dependent angular positions of joints or body segments from the time-dependent three-dimensional linear positions.

17. The machine-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the one or more gait metrics comprise one or more gait complexity metrics.

18. The machine-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the evaluation scores comprise neuropathology scores derived from brain scans of the plurality of patients or cognitive scores based on cognitive testing of the plurality of patients.

19. The machine-readable medium of claim 13 , wherein the neurodegenerative condition comprises at least one of Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, dementia, or heightened fall risk.

20. A system for gait-based testing for a neurodegenerative condition in a patient, the system comprising:

a camera to capture video data of a patient walking; and

one or more computer processors executing instructions stored in memory to perform operations comprising:

processing the video data to obtain gait kinematic data for the patient, the gait kinematic data comprising one or more time-dependent signals each representing a kinematic parameter of a joint or body segment;

processing the gait kinematic data to derive, from the one or more time-dependents signals, one or more respective gait metrics each indicative of a degree of variability, between curve segments for multiple strides within the respective time-dependent signal, in characteristic shapes of the curve segments; and

operating a machine-learning model on input comprising the one or more gait metrics to determine at least one predictive score associated with the neurodegenerative condition and the patient, the machine-learning model trained on a training dataset comprising gait metrics derived from kinematic data for a plurality of patients along with evaluation scores quantifying the neurodegenerative condition in the respective one of the plurality of patients.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 28, 2024
From: MORRIS, RICHARD; SCHNAN MASTRONARDI, BARBARA
To: GAITIQ, INC.
Reel/Frame 066937/0305 →
Continuity (3)
Continuation 16948166 · Sep 4, 2020
Provisional Application 62895973 · Sep 4, 2019
Related Publication 20240382108A1 · Nov 21, 2024
References Cited (39)
US 10445930B1 · Saylor et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20140024971A1 · Bunn et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140276130A1 · Mirelman et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20160147959A1 · Mariottini et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20190110754A1 · Rao · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20210059565A1 · Morris et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2021046583A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Appeal Brief filed Nov. 21, 2022”, 16 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Appeal Decision mailed Dec. 22, 2023”, 8 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Applicant's Summary of Examiner Interview filed Aug. 8, 2022”, 2 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Decision on Pre-Appeal Brief Request for Review mailed Jul. 18, 2022”, 2 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Jul. 6, 2022”, 2 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Examiner Interview Summary mailed Dec. 20, 2021”, 2 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Examiner's Answer mailed Mar. 27, 2023”, 23 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Final Office Action mailed Jan. 18, 2022”, 18 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Final Office Action mailed Mar. 18, 2021”, 19 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 3, 2021”, 21 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 1, 2020”, 18 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Notice of Allowance mailed Mar. 11, 2024”, 9 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Pre-Appeal Brief Request for Review filed Jun. 21, 2022”, 3 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Response Filed Mar. 1, 2021 to Non Final Office Action mailed Dec. 1, 2020”, 11 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Response filed Aug. 18, 2021 to Final Office Action mailed Mar. 18, 2021”, 11 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Response filed Dec. 3, 2021 to Non Final Office Action mailed Sep. 3, 2021”, 8 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“U.S. Appl. No. 16/948,166, Reply Brief Filed May 30, 2023”, 10 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2020/070504, International Preliminary Report on Patentability mailed Mar. 17, 2022”, 7 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2020/070504, International Search Report mailed Nov. 20, 2020”, 2 pgs. [cited by applicant]
“International Application Serial No. PCT/US2020/070504, Written Opinion mailed Nov. 20, 2020”, 5 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Aziz, Wajid, et al., “Complexity analysis of stride interval time series by threshold dependent symbolic entropy”, European journal of applied physiology 98.1, (2006), 30-40. [cited by applicant]
Begg, Rezaul, et al., “A machine learning approach for automated recognition of movement patterns using basic, kinetic and kinematic gait data”, Journal of biomechanics 38.3, (2005), 401-408. [cited by applicant]
Corazza, Stefano, et al., “A markerless motion capture system to study musculoskeletal biomechanics: visual hull and simulated annealing approach”, Annals of biomedical engineering 34.6, (2006), 1019-1029. [cited by applicant]
Decker, Leslie M., et al., “Complexity and Human Gait”, (2010), Journal Articles, 91, (2010), 25 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Devanne, Maxime, et al., “Learning shape variations of motion trajectories for gait analysis”, 23rd International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) IEEE, (2016). [cited by applicant]
Ionescu, Catalin, et al., “Human3.6M: Large Scale Datasets and Predictive Methods for 3D Human Sensing in Natural Environments”, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 36, No. 7, pp. 1325-1… [cited by applicant]
Martinez, Julieta, et al., “A simple yet effective baseline for 3d human pose estimation”, Computer Vision Foundation, ICCV Open Access version, (Oct. 1, 2017), 2640-2649. [cited by applicant]
Mccamley, John D., et al., “On the Calculation of Sample Entropy Using Continuous and Discrete Human Gait Data”, Entrop 2018, 20, 764; doi:10.3390/e20100764, (Oct. 5, 2018), 20 pgs. [cited by applicant]
Rocha, Ana Patricia, et al., “Parkinson's disease assessment based on gait analysis using an innovative RGB-D camera system”, 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society,… [cited by applicant]
Savica, Rodolfo, et al., “Comparison of gait parameters for predicting cognitive decline: the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging”, Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 55.2, (2017), 559-567. [cited by applicant]
Shetty, Sachin, et al., “SVM based machine learning approach to identify Parkinson's disease using gait analysis”, International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies (ICICT). vol. 2. IEEE, (2016). [cited by applicant]
Wennberg, Alexandra MV, et al., “Association between various brain pathologies and gait disturbance”, Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders 43.3-4, (2017), 128-143. [cited by applicant]