Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32317947›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2020

Assessing the Effectiveness of Automated Emotion Recognition in Adults and Children for Clinical Investigation.

Maria Flynn, Dimitris Effraimidis, Anastassia Angelopoulou, Epaminondas Kapetanios, David Williams, Jude Hemanth, Tony Towell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Emotional recognition technologies applied to health: review and challenges.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999) · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria FlynnSchool of Social Sciences, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
Dimitris EffraimidisSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
Anastassia AngelopoulouSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
Epaminondas KapetaniosSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
David WilliamsSchool of Social Sciences, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
Jude HemanthECE Department, Karunya Institute of Technology and Sciences, Coimbatore, India.
Tony TowellSchool of Social Sciences, University of Westminster, London, United Kingdom.
University of Westminster · GBKarunya University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent success stories in automated object or face recognition, partly fuelled by deep learning artificial neural network (ANN) architectures, have led to the advancement of biometric research platforms and, to some extent, the resurrection of Artificial Intelligence (AI). In line with this general trend, inter-disciplinary approaches have been taken to automate the recognition of emotions in adults or children for the benefit of various applications, such as identification of children's emotions prior to a clinical investigation. Within this context, it turns out that automating emotion recognition is far from being straightforward, with several challenges arising for both science (e.g., methodology underpinned by psychology) and technology (e.g., the iMotions biometric research platform). In this paper, we present a methodology and experiment and some interesting findings, which raise the following research questions for the recognition of emotions and attention in humans: (a) the adequacy of well-established techniques such as the International Affective Picture System (IAPS), (b) the adequacy of state-of-the-art biometric research platforms, (c) the extent to which emotional responses may be different in children and adults. Our findings and first attempts to answer some of these research questions are based on a mixed sample of adults and children who took part in the experiment, resulting in a statistical analysis of numerous variables. These are related to both automatically and interactively captured responses of participants to a sample of IAPS pictures.

Indexed as

artificial neural networkbrainclinical investigationcomputingemotion

Identifiers

PMID32317947
PMCPMC7156005
OpenAlexW3015351899

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.