Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34450696›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Intention Prediction and Human Health Condition Detection in Reaching Tasks with Machine Learning Techniques.

Federica Ragni, Leonardo Archetti, Agnès Roby-Brami, Cinzia Amici, Ludovic Saint-Bauzel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Machine Learning for Human Motion Intention Detection.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    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

5 authors.

Federica RagniDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze, 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4186-5356
Leonardo ArchettiDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze, 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.
Agnès Roby-BramiISIR (Institute of Intelligent Systems and Robotics), UMR CNRS 7222, AGATHE Team INSERM U 1150, Sorbonne Université, 75005 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6196-7229
Cinzia AmiciDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Brescia, via Branze, 38, 25123 Brescia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7426-6029
Ludovic Saint-BauzelISIR (Institute of Intelligent Systems and Robotics), UMR CNRS 7222, AGATHE Team INSERM U 1150, Sorbonne Université, 75005 Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4372-4917

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detecting human motion and predicting human intentions by analyzing body signals are challenging but fundamental steps for the implementation of applications presenting human-robot interaction in different contexts, such as robotic rehabilitation in clinical environments, or collaborative robots in industrial fields. Machine learning techniques (MLT) can face the limit of small data amounts, typical of this kind of applications. This paper studies the illustrative case of the reaching movement in 10 healthy subjects and 21 post-stroke patients, comparing the performance of linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and random forest (RF) in: (i) predicting the subject's intention of moving towards a specific direction among a set of possible choices, (ii) detecting if the subject is moving according to a healthy or pathological pattern, and in the case of discriminating the damage location (left or right hemisphere). Data were captured with wearable electromagnetic sensors, and a sub-section of the acquired signals was required for the analyses. The possibility of detecting with which arm (left or right hand) the motion was performed, and the sensitivity of the MLT to variations in the length of the signal sub-section were also evaluated. LDA and RF prediction accuracies were compared: Accuracy improves when only healthy subjects or longer signals portions are considered up to 11% and at least 10%, respectively. RF reveals better estimation performance both as intention predictor (on average 59.91% versus the 62.19% of LDA), and health condition detector (over 90% in all the tests).

Indexed as

HandIntentionElectromyographyHumansMachine LearningMovementhuman intention predictionmachine learningreaching movementwearable sensors

Identifiers

PMID34450696
PMCPMC8399895

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.