Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24037384›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2014

Quantitative measurement of hip protector use and compliance.

Katherine R Evans, Edmond Lou, Chris Woloschuk, Doug Hill, Meng Li, Man-Sang Wong

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Katherine R EvansDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada.
Edmond Lou
Chris Woloschuk
Doug Hill
Meng Li
Man-Sang Wong
University of Alberta · CAHong Kong Polytechnic University · HKAlberta Health Services · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hip protectors are often prescribed to the elderly who are at risk of falling, with the goal of preventing hip fractures. However, determining the effectiveness of hip protectors has been hampered by unreliable compliance data. This study reports a reliable objective method of measuring compliance and the developed method could be used in any climate, regardless of temperature. Custom compliance monitors were built and embedded inside hip protectors. An algorithm was developed to utilize both temperature and acceleration to determine compliance. Seven young volunteers (age 24.6 ± 4.2 years old) wore the protectors for a total of 667 h while closely recording their compliance. One female (77 years old) who had hip fracture history wore the compliance monitors for 91.6 % of the time during a 1-week stay in a hospital. From the volunteers' trial, using temperature alone overpredicted compliance by 1.2 % and using acceleration alone overpredicted by 5.4 %, but using a combination of the two methods plus a correction factor only underestimated by 0.6 %. From the elderly data, the average compliance recorded from the temperature, acceleration, and combined methods with correction was 94.6, 88.9, and 90.2, respectively. The high accuracy of temperature sensors in this study will not be attainable in hot climates where most of the worldwide increase in hip fractures is occurring. The developed monitor with the algorithm provided high accuracy in determining compliance and was able to determine both the longitudinal and cross-sectional compliance at any time.

Indexed as

Protective DevicesAdultAgedFemaleHip FracturesHumansMalePatient ComplianceYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID24037384
OpenAlexW2008472633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.