ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2023
A Comparison of Inertial Measurement Units and Overnight Videography to Assess Sleep Biomechanics.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing Biomechanics-Based Motion Analysis from Methodology to Application.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe assessment of sleep biomechanics (comprising movement and position during sleep) is of interest in a wide variety of clinical and research settings. However, there is no standard method by which sleep biomechanics are measured. This study aimed to (1) compare the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the current clinical standard, manually coded overnight videography, and (2) compare sleep position recorded using overnight videography to sleep position recorded using the XSENS DOT wearable sensor platform.
methodsTen healthy adult volunteers slept for one night with XSENS DOT units in situ (on their chest, pelvis, and left and right thighs), with three infrared video cameras recording concurrently. Ten clips per participant were edited from the video. Sleeping position in each clip was coded by six experienced allied health professionals using the novel Body Orientation During Sleep (BODS) Framework, comprising 12 sections in a 360-degree circle. Intra-rater reliability was assessed by calculating the differences between the BODS ratings from repeated clips and the percentage who were rated with a maximum of one section of the XSENS DOT value; the same methodology was used to establish the level of agreement between the XSENS DOT and allied health professional ratings of overnight videography. Bennett's S-Score was used to assess inter-rater reliability.
resultsHigh intra-rater reliability (90% of ratings with maximum difference of one section) and moderate inter-rater reliability (Bennett's S-Score 0.466 to 0.632) were demonstrated in the BODS ratings. The raters demonstrated high levels of agreement overall with the XSENS DOT platform, with 90% of ratings from allied health raters being within the range of at least 1 section of the BODS (as compared to the corresponding XSENS DOT produced rating).
conclusionsThe current clinical standard for assessing sleep biomechanics, manually rated overnight videography (as rated using the BODS Framework) demonstrated acceptable intra- and inter-rater reliability. Further, the XSENS DOT platform demonstrated satisfactory levels of agreement as compared to the current clinical standard, providing confidence for its use in future studies of sleep biomechanics.
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.