ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2019
A Combination of Indoor Localization and Wearable Sensor-Based Physical Activity Recognition to Assess Older Patients Undergoing Subacute Rehabilitation: Baseline Study Results.
Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Advancements in Wearable Sensor Technologies for Health Monitoring in Terms of Clinical Applications, Rehabilitation, and Disease Risk Assessment: Systematic Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Pooled it
- Definition and Test-Retest Reliability of a Monitoring Method Integrating Accelerometric Actigraphy and Bluetooth Indoor Location Tracking Applied in a Long-Term Residential Unit for Persons With Dementia: Longitudinal Observational Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Observational
- Remote Patient Monitoring for Global Emergencies: Case Study in Patients With COVID-19.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Article
- Developing remote patient monitoring infrastructure using commercially available cloud platforms.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
- Multisensory System for Long-Term Activity Monitoring to Facilitate Aging-in-Place.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Developing a Smartwatch-Based Healthcare Application: Notes to Consider.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Continuous Monitoring of Health and Mobility Indicators in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Review of Recent Technologies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Telehealth solutions for assessing auditory outcomes related to noise and ototoxic exposures in clinic and research.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022Article
- Physical Activity Behavior of Patients at a Skilled Nursing Facility: Longitudinal Cohort Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2022Article
- Multi-AP and Test Point Accuracy of the Results in WiFi Indoor Localization.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Indoor Location Data for Tracking Human Behaviours: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Remote Monitoring of Patients With Hematologic Malignancies at High Risk of Febrile Neutropenia: Exploratory Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: An Overview.Current medical science · 2021Review
- Bluetooth Low Energy Beacon Sensors to Document Handheld Magnifier Use at Home by People with Low Vision.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Upper-Limb Motion Recognition Based on Hybrid Feature Selection: Algorithm Development and Validation.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
- Remote, Unsupervised Functional Motor Task Evaluation in Older Adults across the United States Using the MindCrowd Electronic Cohort.Developmental neuropsychology · 2021Article
- Development and Clinical Evaluation of a Web-Based Upper Limb Home Rehabilitation System Using a Smartwatch and Machine Learning Model for Chronic Stroke Survivors: Prospective Comparative Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Automate, Illuminate, Predict: A Universal Framework for Integrating Wearable Sensors in Healthcare.Digital biomarkersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth care, in recent years, has made great leaps in integrating wireless technology into traditional models of care. The availability of ubiquitous devices such as wearable sensors has enabled researchers to collect voluminous datasets and harness them in a wide range of health care topics. One of the goals of using on-body wearable sensors has been to study and analyze human activity and functional patterns, thereby predicting harmful outcomes such as falls. It can also be used to track precise individual movements to form personalized behavioral patterns, to standardize the concept of frailty, well-being/independence, etc. Most wearable devices such as activity trackers and smartwatches are equipped with low-cost embedded sensors that can provide users with health statistics. In addition to wearable devices, Bluetooth low-energy sensors known as BLE beacons have gained traction among researchers in ambient intelligence domain. The low cost and durability of newer versions have made BLE beacons feasible gadgets to yield indoor localization data, an adjunct feature in human activity recognition. In the studies by Moatamed et al and the patent application by Ramezani et al, we introduced a generic framework (Sensing At-Risk Population) that draws on the classification of human movements using a 3-axial accelerometer and extracting indoor localization using BLE beacons, in concert.
objectiveThe study aimed to examine the ability of combination of physical activity and indoor location features, extracted at baseline, on a cohort of 154 rehabilitation-dwelling patients to discriminate between subacute care patients who are re-admitted to the hospital versus the patients who are able to stay in a community setting.
methodsWe analyzed physical activity sensor features to assess activity time and intensity. We also analyzed activities with regard to indoor localization. Chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare demographic variables and sensor feature variables in outcome groups. Random forests were used to build predictive models based on the most significant features.
resultsStanding time percentage (P<.001, d=1.51), laying down time percentage (P<.001, d=1.35), resident room energy intensity (P<.001, d=1.25), resident bed energy intensity (P<.001, d=1.23), and energy percentage of active state (P=.001, d=1.24) are the 5 most statistically significant features in distinguishing outcome groups at baseline. The energy intensity of the resident room (P<.001, d=1.25) was achieved by capturing indoor localization information. Random forests revealed that the energy intensity of the resident room, as a standalone attribute, is the most sensitive parameter in the identification of outcome groups (area under the curve=0.84).
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that a combination of indoor localization and physical activity tracking produces a series of features at baseline, a subset of which can better distinguish between at-risk patients that can gain independence versus the patients that are rehospitalized.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.