ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Can Wearable Inertial Measurement Units Be Used to Measure Sleep Biomechanics? Establishing Initial Feasibility and Validity.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification of 3D Kinematic Measurements for Knee Flexion and Tibial Rotation Using an IMU-Based Sensor and Ultrasound Imaging System: A Cadaveric Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Feasibility of Using Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) to Augment Cadaveric Temporal Training.The Laryngoscope · 2025Article
- Quantitative detection of sleep apnea in adults using inertial measurement unit embedded in wristwatch wearable devices.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A Comparison of Inertial Measurement Units and Overnight Videography to Assess Sleep Biomechanics.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wearable motion sensors, specifically, Inertial Measurement Units, are useful tools for the assessment of orientation and movement during sleep. The DOTs platform (Xsens, Enschede, The Netherlands) has shown promise for this purpose. This pilot study aimed to assess its feasibility and validity for recording sleep biomechanics. Feasibility was assessed using four metrics: Drift, Battery Life, Reliability of Recording, and Participant Comfort. Each metric was rated as Stop (least successful), Continue But Modify Protocol, Continue But Monitor Closely, or Continue Without Modifications (most successful). A convenience sample of ten adults slept for one night with a DOT unit attached to their sternum, abdomen, and left and right legs. A survey was administered the following day to assess participant comfort wearing the DOTs. A subset of five participants underwent a single evaluation in a Vicon (Oxford Metrics, Oxford, UK) motion analysis lab to assess XSENS DOTs’ validity. With the two systems recording simultaneously, participants were prompted through a series of movements intended to mimic typical sleep biomechanics (rolling over in lying), and the outputs of both systems were compared to assess the level of agreement. The DOT platform performed well on all metrics, with Drift, Battery Life, and Recording Reliability being rated as Continue Without Modifications. Participant Comfort was rated as Continue But Monitor Closely. The DOT Platform demonstrated an extremely high level of agreement with the Vicon motion analysis lab (difference of <0.025°). Using the Xsens DOT platform to assess sleep biomechanics is feasible and valid in adult populations. Future studies should further investigate the feasibility of using this data capture method for extended periods (e.g., multiple days) and in other groups (e.g., paediatric populations).
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.