Thomas Jürgen Klotzbier1, Bettina Wollesen2,3, Oliver Vogel2, Julian Rudisch4, Thomas Cordes2, Thomas Jöllenbeck5,6, Lutz Vogt7. 1. Department of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Stuttgart, Allmandring 28, 70569, Stuttgart, Germany. thomas.klotzbier@inspo.uni-stuttgart.de. 2. Department of Human Movement Science, University of Hamburg, Mollerstraße 10, 20148, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Biological Psychology and Neuroergonomics, TU Berlin, Fasanenstr. 1, 10623, Berlin, Germany. 4. Department of Neuromotor Behavior and Exercise, Institute of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Münster, Horstmarer Landweg 62B, 48149, Münster, Germany. 5. Institute for Biomechanics, Clinic Lindenplatz, Weslarner Str. 29, 59505, Bad Sassendorf, Germany. 6. Department of Exercise & Health, University of Paderborn, Warburger Straße 100, 33098, Paderborn, Germany. 7. Department of Sports Medicine, Goethe University Frankfurt am Main, Ginnheimer Landstr. 39, 60487, Frankfurt, Germany.
Correction: Eur Rev Aging Phys Act 18, 17 (2021)https://doi.org/10.1186/s11556-021-00271-zIn the publication of the original article [1] the authors state that the GaitUp system does not allow access to the raw data: “[…] the algorithms of GaitUp are difficult to comprehend because the raw data cannot be accessed” (page 2) and “[…] GaitUp does not allow access to the raw data, so the data cannot be extracted or analyzed independently (page 9).Since the Physilog 5 launch in 2017, GaitUp has provided the free “Research Toolkit” to its users. This has always been a free on-demand service for all customers (who are only equipped with Physilog 5 or related products such as the gait analysis system used in our study - which was acquired from the University of Paderborn in 2018). Therefore, our statement that the raw data of the acceleration values cannot be accessed, extracted, or analyzed is not correct.For this reason, the false statements have been deleted and the original article [1] has been updated.