ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Recognizing Manual Activities Using Wearable Inertial Measurement Units: Clinical Application for Outcome Measurement.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of instrumented assessments for upper limb function in cerebral palsy: current limitations and future directions.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Pooled it
- Trends and Innovations in Wearable Technology for Motor Rehabilitation, Prediction, and Monitoring: A Comprehensive Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to monitor activities of daily living in the natural environments of patients could become a valuable tool for various clinical applications. In this paper, we show that a simple algorithm is capable of classifying manual activities of daily living (ADL) into categories using data from wrist- and finger-worn sensors. Six participants without pathology of the upper limb performed 14 ADL. Gyroscope signals were used to analyze the angular velocity pattern for each activity. The elaboration of the algorithm was based on the examination of the activity at the different levels (hand, fingers and wrist) and the relationship between them for the duration of the activity. A leave-one-out cross-validation was used to validate our algorithm. The algorithm allowed the classification of manual activities into five different categories through three consecutive steps, based on hands ratio (i.e., activity of one or both hands) and fingers-to-wrist ratio (i.e., finger movement independently of the wrist). On average, the algorithm made the correct classification in 87.4% of cases. The proposed algorithm has a high overall accuracy, yet its computational complexity is very low as it involves only averages and ratios.
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.