Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29176316›Full record

ArticleGerontology2018

Toward Using a Smartwatch to Monitor Frailty in a Hospital Setting: Using a Single Wrist-Wearable Sensor to Assess Frailty in Bedbound Inpatients.

Hyoki Lee, Bellal Joseph, Ana Enriquez, Bijan Najafi

Open access · greenAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gerontology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Deep Neural Network-Based Video Processing to Obtain Dual-Task Upper-Extremity Motor Performance Toward Assessment of Cognitive and Motor Function.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2023
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hyoki LeeInterdisciplinary Consortium on Advanced Motion Performance (iCAMP), Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Bellal Joseph
Ana Enriquez
Bijan Najafi
Baylor College of Medicine · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

Upper Extremity Frailty Assessment ToolR44AG050338 · NIA · BIOSENSICS, LLC · PI GWIN, JOSEPH T, JOSEPH, BELLAL · 2015 to 2016
$1.5M
NIA NIH HHS R44 AG050338
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile various objective tools have been validated for assessing physical frailty in the geriatric population, these are often unsuitable for busy clinics and mobility-impaired patients. Recently, we have developed a frailty meter (FM) using two wearable sensors, which allows capturing key frailty phenotypes (weakness, slowness, and exhaustion), by testing 20-s rapid elbow flexion-extension test.

objectiveIn this study, we proposed an enhanced automated algorithm to identify frailty using a single wrist-worn sensor.

methodsThe data collected from 100 geriatric inpatients (age: 78.9 ± 9.1 years, 49% frail) were reanalyzed to validate the new algorithm. The frailty status of the participants was determined using a validated modified frailty index. Different FM phenotypes (31 features) including velocity of elbow rotation, decline in velocity of elbow rotation over 20 s, range of motion, etc. were extracted. A regression model, bootstrap with 2,000 iterations, and recursive feature elimination technique were used for optimizing the FM parameters and identifying frailty using a single wrist-worn sensor.

resultsA strong agreement was observed between two-sensor and wrist-worn sensor configuration (r = 0.87, p < 0.001). Results suggest that the wrist-worn FM with no demographic information still yields a high accuracy of 80.0% (95% CI: 79.7-80.3%) and an area under the curve of 87.7% (95% CI: 87.4-87.9%) to identify frailty status. Results are comparable with two-sensor configuration, where the observed accuracy and area under the curve were 80.6% (95% CI: 80.4-80.9%) and 87.4% (95% CI: 87.1-87.6%), respectively.

conclusionThe simplicity of FM may open new avenues to integrate wearable technology and mobile health to capture frailty status in a busy hospital setting. Furthermore, the reduction of needed sensors to a single wrist-worn sensor allows deployment of the proposed algorithm in the form of a smartwatch application. From the application standpoint, the proposed FM is superior to traditional physical frailty-screening tools in which the walking test is a key frailty phenotype, and thus they cannot be used for bedbound patients or in busy clinics where administration of gait test as a part of routine assessment is impractical.

Indexed as

Wearable Electronic DevicesAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleFrail ElderlyFrailtyGeriatric AssessmentHumansInpatientsMaleMonitoring, PhysiologicSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedWristFrailty meterFrailty phenotypeGeriatric populationMobile healthWearable technology

Identifiers

PMID29176316
PMCPMC5970017
OpenAlexW2768567322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.