Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32604794›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Using a Motion Sensor to Categorize Nonspecific Low Back Pain Patients: A Machine Learning Approach.

Masoud Abdollahi, Sajad Ashouri, Mohsen Abedi, Nasibeh Azadeh-Fard, Mohamad Parnianpour, Kinda Khalaf, Ehsan Rashedi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Artificial Intelligence and Computer Aided Diagnosis in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Pain Medicine.Current pain and headache reports · 2024
    Review
  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

7 authors.

Masoud AbdollahiDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8941-0182
Sajad AshouriCollege of Business and Law, RMIT University, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia.
Mohsen AbediDepartment of Physiotherapy, Physiotherapy Research Center, School of Rehabilitation, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran 1616913111, Iran.
Nasibeh Azadeh-FardDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA.
Mohamad ParnianpourMechanical Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran 1136511155, Iran.
Kinda KhalafDepartment of Biomedical Engineering and Health Engineering Innovation Center, Khalifa University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 127788 Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Ehsan RashediDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nonspecific low back pain (NSLBP) constitutes a critical health challenge that impacts millions of people worldwide with devastating health and socioeconomic consequences. In today's clinical settings, practitioners continue to follow conventional guidelines to categorize NSLBP patients based on subjective approaches, such as the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST). This study aimed to develop a sensor-based machine learning model to classify NSLBP patients into different subgroups according to quantitative kinematic data, i.e., trunk motion and balance-related measures, in conjunction with STarT output. Specifically, inertial measurement units (IMU) were attached to the trunks of ninety-four patients while they performed repetitive trunk flexion/extension movements on a balance board at self-selected pace. Machine learning algorithms (support vector machine (SVM) and multi-layer perceptron (MLP)) were implemented for model development, and SBST results were used as ground truth. The results demonstrated that kinematic data could successfully be used to categorize patients into two main groups: high vs. low-medium risk. Accuracy levels of ~75% and 60% were achieved for SVM and MLP, respectively. Additionally, among a range of variables detailed herein, time-scaled IMU signals yielded the highest accuracy levels (i.e., ~75%). Our findings support the improvement and use of wearable systems in developing diagnostic and prognostic tools for various healthcare applications. This can facilitate development of an improved, cost-effective quantitative NSLBP assessment tool in clinical and home settings towards effective personalized rehabilitation.

Indexed as

Biomechanical PhenomenaLow Back PainMachine LearningTorsoAdultHumansMiddle Agedclassificationobjective clinical decision-makingpattern recognitionSTarT back screening tooltrunk kinematicswearable systems

Identifiers

PMID32604794
PMCPMC7348921

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.