ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2022
Acceptability of wearable inertial sensors, completeness of data, and day-to-day variability of everyday life motor activities in children and adolescents with neuromotor impairments.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Holistic Approach Towards Evaluating Upper Limb Function in Children with Unilateral Cerebral Palsy: A Narrative Review of Clinical Tools and Promising Technologies for Comprehensive Assessment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Monitoring Activity and Gait in Children (MAGIC) using digital health technologies.Pediatric research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monitoring the patients' motor activities in a real-world setting would provide essential information on their functioning in daily life. In this study, we used wearable inertial sensors to monitor motor activities of children and adolescents with congenital and acquired brain injuries. We derived a set of clinically meaningful performance measures and addressed the following research questions: Is the target population willing to wear the sensors in their habitual environment? Which factors lead to missing data, and can we avoid them? How many measurement days are needed to obtain reliable estimates of the children's and adolescents' motor performance? The study participants wore our sensor system for seven consecutive days during waking hours. First, we derived the daily hand use of all participants, the duration of different body positions and the wheeling activity of individuals using a manual wheelchair, and walking-related measures in individuals being able to walk. Then, we analyzed the reasons for missing data and determined the reliability of the performance measures mentioned above. The large majority (41 of 43 participants) was willing to wear the sensor system for a week. However, forgetting to reattach the sensors after charging them overnight and taking them off during bathing and swimming was the main contributor to missing data. Consequently, improved battery life and waterproofness of the sensor technology are essential requirements for measurements in daily life. Besides, 5 of 11 performance measures showed significant differences between weekdays and weekend days. The reliability, measured with the intraclass correlation coefficient, ranged between 0.82 and 0.98. Seven measurement days were enough to obtain significantly higher reliability scores than the desired level of 0.8 for all but two performance measures. In children and adolescents with neuromotor impairments, we recommend monitoring everyday life motor activities on seven consecutive days. The target population accepted this measurement protocol, it covers school days and weekend days, and the number of measurement days is sufficient to obtain reliable estimates of motor performance.
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.