ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Identification and Quantification of Activities Common to Intensive Care Patients; Development and Validation of a Dual-Accelerometer-Based Algorithm.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to develop and validate an algorithm that can identify the type, frequency, and duration of activities common to intensive care (IC) patients. Ten healthy participants wore two accelerometers on their chest and leg while performing 14 activities clustered into four protocols (i.e., natural, strict, healthcare provider, and bed cycling). A video served as the reference standard, with two raters classifying the type and duration of all activities. This classification was reliable as intraclass correlations were all above 0.76 except for walking in the healthcare provider protocol, (0.29). The data of four participants were used to develop and optimize the algorithm by adjusting body-segment angles and rest-activity-threshold values based on percentage agreement (%Agr) with the reference. The validity of the algorithm was subsequently assessed using the data from the remaining six participants. %Agr of the algorithm versus the reference standard regarding lying, sitting activities, and transitions was 95%, 74%, and 80%, respectively, for all protocols except transitions with the help of a healthcare provider, which was 14-18%. For bed cycling, %Agr was 57-76%. This study demonstrated that the developed algorithm is suitable for identifying and quantifying activities common for intensive care patients. Knowledge on the (in)activity of these patients and their impact will optimize mobilization.
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.