Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34300546›Full record

SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

The Contribution of Machine Learning in the Validation of Commercial Wearable Sensors for Gait Monitoring in Patients: A Systematic Review.

Théo Jourdan, Noëlie Debs, Carole Frindel

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Théo JourdanUniv Lyon, INSA Lyon, Inria, CITI, F-69621 Villeurbanne, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5485-7710
Noëlie DebsUniv Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1294, F-69621 Villeurbanne, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9958-8806
Carole FrindelUniv Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1294, F-69621 Villeurbanne, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4570-0994
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-20-CE23-0013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gait, balance, and coordination are important in the development of chronic disease, but the ability to accurately assess these in the daily lives of patients may be limited by traditional biased assessment tools. Wearable sensors offer the possibility of minimizing the main limitations of traditional assessment tools by generating quantitative data on a regular basis, which can greatly improve the home monitoring of patients. However, these commercial sensors must be validated in this context with rigorous validation methods. This scoping review summarizes the state-of-the-art between 2010 and 2020 in terms of the use of commercial wearable devices for gait monitoring in patients. For this specific period, 10 databases were searched and 564 records were retrieved from the associated search. This scoping review included 70 studies investigating one or more wearable sensors used to automatically track patient gait in the field. The majority of studies (95%) utilized accelerometers either by itself (N = 17 of 70) or embedded into a device (N = 57 of 70) and/or gyroscopes (51%) to automatically monitor gait via wearable sensors. All of the studies (N = 70) used one or more validation methods in which "ground truth" data were reported. Regarding the validation of wearable sensors, studies using machine learning have become more numerous since 2010, at 17% of included studies. This scoping review highlights the current state of the ability of commercial sensors to enhance traditional methods of gait assessment by passively monitoring gait in daily life, over long periods of time, and with minimal user interaction. Considering our review of the last 10 years in this field, machine learning approaches are algorithms to be considered for the future. These are in fact data-based approaches which, as long as the data collected are numerous, annotated, and representative, allow for the training of an effective model. In this context, commercial wearable sensors allowing for increased data collection and good patient adherence through efforts of miniaturization, energy consumption, and comfort will contribute to its future success.

Indexed as

Gait AnalysisWearable Electronic DevicesGaitHumansMachine LearningMonitoring, Physiologicchronic pathologygaitgold standardmachine learningsystematic reviewtrackervalidationwearable

Identifiers

PMID34300546
PMCPMC8309920
OpenAlexW3178803406

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.