Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26560737›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Automatic Fall Detection System Based on the Combined Use of a Smartphone and a Smartwatch.

Eduardo Casilari, Miguel A Oviedo-Jiménez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Eduardo CasilariDepartamento de Tecnología Electrónica, Universidad de Málaga, Malaga, Spain.
Miguel A Oviedo-JiménezDepartamento de Tecnología Electrónica, Universidad de Málaga, Malaga, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to their widespread popularity, decreasing costs, built-in sensors, computing power and communication capabilities, Android-based personal devices are being seen as an appealing technology for the deployment of wearable fall detection systems. In contrast with previous solutions in the existing literature, which are based on the performance of a single element (a smartphone), this paper proposes and evaluates a fall detection system that benefits from the detection performed by two popular personal devices: a smartphone and a smartwatch (both provided with an embedded accelerometer and a gyroscope). In the proposed architecture, a specific application in each component permanently tracks and analyses the patient's movements. Diverse fall detection algorithms (commonly employed in the literature) were implemented in the developed Android apps to discriminate falls from the conventional activities of daily living of the patient. As a novelty, a fall is only assumed to have occurred if it is simultaneously and independently detected by the two Android devices (which can interact via Bluetooth communication). The system was systematically evaluated in an experimental testbed with actual test subjects simulating a set of falls and conventional movements associated with activities of daily living. The tests were repeated by varying the detection algorithm as well as the pre-defined mobility patterns executed by the subjects (i.e., the typology of the falls and non-fall movements). The proposed system was compared with the cases where only one device (the smartphone or the smartwatch) is considered to recognize and discriminate the falls. The obtained results show that the joint use of the two detection devices clearly increases the system's capability to avoid false alarms or 'false positives' (those conventional movements misidentified as falls) while maintaining the effectiveness of the detection decisions (that is to say, without increasing the ratio of 'false negatives' or actual falls that remain undetected).

Indexed as

Accidental FallsAutomationSecurity MeasuresSmartphoneAlgorithmsHumans

Identifiers

PMID26560737
PMCPMC4641636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.