Table 6.

Wearable systems compared to values reported in literature.

Article and Sport	System Used	Reliability
Chardonnens et al. (2013a)—Skiing [7]	Seven Physilog inertial measurement units (IMUs) (GaitUp, Lausanne, Switzerland)	Validity of the system was assessed by comparing ski horizontal angle at landing impact to hill slope: −0.2 ± 4.8°, max value 11.5°. When compared to literature data, differences were smaller than 6° for 75% of the angles and smaller than 15° for 90% of the angles.
Chardonnens et al. (2014)—Skiing [5]	Seven Physilog IMUs (GaitUp, Lausanne, Switzerland)	Maximum centre of mass (CoM) velocity for Group 1 was 2.51 ± 0.83 m/s and for Group 2 was 2.23 ± 0.28 m/s compared to 2.3 m/s reported in literature.
Meamarbashi et al. (2010)—Football [31]	Sensor module and data logger	Angular velocity of the shank in the x-axis of 1911.2 ± 241.6°/s is comparable with the widely accepted value reported by Nunome et al. (2006) of 2257 ± 224.6° [66]
Munz et al. (2013)—Equestrian [39]	Two MTx inertial sensors (Xsens Technologies B.V., Enschede, The Netherlands)	Inter-individual differences were found for anterior-posterior (AP) and lateral (LT) angles in sitting trot (13.3 ± 2.3° and 6.4 ± 1.1° respectively), corresponding well with values in literature (13.9 ± 2.2° and 5.1 ± 1.1° respectively) reported by Byström et al. (2009) [67]