Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34238323›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2021

How wearable sensors have been utilised to evaluate frailty in older adults: a systematic review.

Grainne Vavasour, Oonagh M Giggins, Julie Doyle, Daniel Kelly

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  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.

Grainne VavasourNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology. Co, Louth, A91 K584, Ireland. vavasoug@dkit.ie.ORCID 0000-0002-1929-4235
Oonagh M GigginsNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology. Co, Louth, A91 K584, Ireland.
Julie DoyleNetwellCASALA, Dundalk Institute of Technology. Co, Louth, A91 K584, Ireland.
Daniel KellyUlster University Faculty of Computing Engineering and The Built Environment, Derry(Londonderry), BT48 7JL, Northern Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobally the population of older adults is increasing. It is estimated that by 2050 the number of adults over the age of 60 will represent over 21% of the world's population. Frailty is a clinical condition associated with ageing resulting in an increase in adverse outcomes. It is considered the greatest challenge facing an ageing population affecting an estimated 16% of community-dwelling populations worldwide.

aimThe aim of this systematic review is to explore how wearable sensors have been used to assess frailty in older adults.

methodElectronic databases Medline, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL were systematically searched March 2020 and November 2020. A search constraint of articles published in English, between January 2010 and November 2020 was applied. Papers included were primary observational studies involving; older adults aged > 60 years, used a wearable sensor to provide quantitative measurements of physical activity (PA) or mobility and a measure of frailty. Studies were excluded if they used non-wearable sensors for outcome measurement or outlined an algorithm or application development exclusively. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using the Appraisal Tool for Cross-sectional Studies (AXIS).

resultsTwenty-nine studies examining the use of wearable sensors to assess and discriminate between stages of frailty in older adults were included. Thirteen different body-worn sensors were used in eight different body-locations. Participants were community-dwelling older adults. Studies were performed in home, laboratory or hospital settings. Postural transitions, number of steps, percentage of time in PA and intensity of PA together were the most frequently measured parameters followed closely by gait speed. All but one study demonstrated an association between PA and level of frailty. All reports of gait speed indicate correlation with frailty.

conclusionsWearable sensors have been successfully used to evaluate frailty in older adults. Further research is needed to identify a feasible, user-friendly device and body-location that can be used to identify signs of pre-frailty in community-dwelling older adults. This would facilitate early identification and targeted intervention to reduce the burden of frailty in an ageing population.

Indexed as

FrailtyWearable Electronic DevicesAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFrail ElderlyHumansIndependent LivingFrailtyMobilityOlder adultsPhysical ActivityWearable sensor

Identifiers

PMID34238323
PMCPMC8268245

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.