Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36480243›Full record

ArticleJMIR cancer2022

Using Wearable Inertial Sensors to Assess Mobility of Patients With Hematologic Cancer and Associations With Chemotherapy-Related Symptoms Before Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant: Cross-sectional Study.

Meghan B Skiba, Graham Harker, Carolyn Guidarelli, Mahmoud El-Gohary, Fay Horak, Eric J Roeland, Rebecca Silbermann, Brandon Hayes-Lattin, Kerri Winters-Stone

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Aging in motion: how age and age simulation shape dual-task walking and memory.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Meghan B SkibaBiobehavioral Health Science Division, College of Nursing, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2244-5575
Graham HarkerDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2959-3837
Carolyn GuidarelliDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7587-3426
Mahmoud El-GoharyAPDM, Inc, a division of Clario International, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2678-8823
Fay HorakDepartment of Neurology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7704-5459
Eric J RoelandDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3674-3573
Rebecca SilbermannDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7571-1523
Brandon Hayes-LattinDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4380-4573
Kerri Winters-StoneDivision of Oncological Sciences, Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1706-8020
Oregon Health & Science University · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

Understanding the origins of rapid recurrence of pancreatic cancer after resectionP30CA069533 · NCI · OREGON HEALTH & SCIENCE UNIVERSITY · PI Luiz Eduardo Bertassoni · 1997 to 2026
$60.5M
NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201600067CNCI NIH HHS P30 CA069533
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWearable sensors could be a simple way to quantify and characterize mobility in patients with hematologic cancer scheduled to receive autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHSCT) and how they may be related to common treatment-related symptoms and side effects of induction chemotherapy.

objectiveWe aimed to conduct a cross-sectional study comparing mobility in patients scheduled to receive autoHSCT with that in healthy, age-matched adult controls and determine the relationships between patient mobility and chemotherapy-related symptoms.

methodsPatients scheduled to receive autoHSCT (78/156, 50%) and controls (78/156, 50%) completed the prescribed performance tests using wearable inertial sensors to quantify mobility including turning (turn duration and number of steps), gait (gait speed, stride time, stride time variability, double support time, coronal trunk range of motion, heel strike angle, and distance traveled), and balance (coronal sway, coronal range, coronal velocity, coronal centroidal frequency, sagittal sway, sagittal range, sagittal velocity, and sagittal centroidal frequency). Patients completed the validated patient-reported questionnaires to assess symptoms common to chemotherapy: chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity subscale), nausea and pain (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire), fatigue (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue Short Form 8a), vertigo (Vertigo Symptom Scale-short form), and depression (Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression). Paired, 2-sided t tests were used to compare mobility between patients and controls. Stepwise multivariable linear regression models were used to evaluate associations between patient mobility and symptoms.

resultsPatients aged 60.3 (SD 10.3) years had significantly worse turning (turn duration; P<.001), gait (gait speed, stride time, stride time variability, double support time, heel strike angle, stride length, and distance traveled; all P<.001), and balance (coronal sway; P<.001, range; P<.001, velocity; P=.02, and frequency; P=.02; and sagittal range; P=.008) than controls. In patients, high nausea was associated with worse stride time variability (ß=.001; P=.005) and heel strike angle (ß=-.088; P=.02). Pain was associated with worse gait speed (ß=-.003; P=.003), stride time variability (ß=.012; P=.02), stride length (ß=-.002; P=.004), and distance traveled (ß=-.786; P=.005). Nausea and pain explained 17% to 33% and 14% to 36% of gait variance measured in patients, respectively.

conclusionsPatients scheduled to receive autoHSCT demonstrated worse mobility in multiple turning, gait, and balance domains compared with controls, potentially related in part to nausea and pain. Wearable inertial sensors used in the clinic setting could provide granular information about mobility before further treatment, which may in turn benefit from rehabilitation or symptom management. Future longitudinal studies are needed to better understand temporal changes in mobility and symptoms across the treatment trajectory to optimally time, design, and implement strategies, to preserve functioning in patients with hematologic cancer in the long term.

Indexed as

autoHSCTautologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantchemotherapy-related symptomsgaitinduction chemotherapymobilitywearable inertial sensor

Identifiers

PMID36480243
PMCPMC9782382
OpenAlexW4310943831

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.