Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38139507›Full record

SynthesisSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Objective Measurement of Posture and Movement in Young Children Using Wearable Sensors and Customised Mathematical Approaches: A Systematic Review.

Danica Hendry, Andrew L Rohl, Charlotte Lund Rasmussen, Juliana Zabatiero, Dylan P Cliff, Simon S Smith, Janelle Mackenzie, Cassandra L Pattinson, Leon Straker, Amity Campbell

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Danica HendrySchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Andrew L RohlARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Brisbane, ACT 2609, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0038-2785
Charlotte Lund RasmussenSchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Juliana ZabatieroSchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6815-7544
Dylan P CliffARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Brisbane, ACT 2609, Australia.
Simon S SmithARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Brisbane, ACT 2609, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0362-9045
Janelle MackenzieARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Brisbane, ACT 2609, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6320-9739
Cassandra L PattinsonARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, Brisbane, ACT 2609, Australia.
Leon StrakerSchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7786-4128
Amity CampbellSchool of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Curtin University · AUThe University of Queensland · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Wollongong · AU

Funding

Australian Research Council CE200100022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Given the importance of young children's postures and movements to health and development, robust objective measures are required to provide high-quality evidence. This study aimed to systematically review the available evidence for objective measurement of young (0-5 years) children's posture and movement using machine learning and other algorithm methods on accelerometer data. From 1663 papers, a total of 20 papers reporting on 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Papers were quality-assessed and data extracted and synthesised on sample, postures and movements identified, sensors used, model development, and accuracy. A common limitation of studies was a poor description of their sample data, yet over half scored adequate/good on their overall study design quality assessment. There was great diversity in all aspects examined, with evidence of increasing sophistication in approaches used over time. Model accuracy varied greatly, but for a range of postures and movements, models developed on a reasonable-sized (n > 25) sample were able to achieve an accuracy of >80%. Issues related to model development are discussed and implications for future research outlined. The current evidence suggests the rapidly developing field of machine learning has clear potential to enable the collection of high-quality evidence on the postures and movements of young children.

Indexed as

MovementWearable Electronic DevicesAlgorithmsChildChild, PreschoolHumansMachine LearningPostureactivity trackingchildrenmachine learningmovementposturereview

Identifiers

PMID38139507
PMCPMC10747033
OpenAlexW4389365875

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.